Board of Trustees Ohio University Athens Campus
Agenda
April 20, 2012
BOARD ACTIVITIES FOR April 19 & 20, 2012 Ohio University – Athens Campus
Activity & Committee Meeting Schedule
Thursday, April 19, 2012
8:30 a.m. Convene at Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room
9:00 a.m. RCM Overview - “Responsibility Centered Management: A Panel of Experts Discusses RCM Opportunities Offered and Lessons Learned”
11:30 a.m. Lunch, President’s Dining Room, 4th Floor Baker University Center
12:30 p.m. University Academics and Resources Joint Committee Meeting, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104
2:00 p.m. University Resources Committee, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125
2:00 p.m. University Academics Committee, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104
4:30 p.m. Governance Committee, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125
4:30 p.m. Audit Committee, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 127
6:30 p.m. Reception – Trustees, President, First Lady, Executive Staff, Board Secretary – 29 Park Place, President’s Residence
7:00 p.m. Dinner – Trustees, President, First Lady, Executive Staff, Board Secretary – 29 Park Place, President’s Residence
Friday, April 20, 2012
7:30 a.m. Trustee Breakfast, Executive Committee, Wilson Room, Ohio University Inn
10:00 a.m. Board Meeting, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104
Noon Media Availability, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125
Noon Trustee Luncheon, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 127
AGENDA Board of Trustees’ Meeting Friday, April 20, 2012 – 10:00 a.m. Governance Room, Margaret M. Walter Hall, Athens Campus
OPEN SESSION
Roll Call
Approval of Agenda
1. Consent Agenda, Minutes of Board of Trustees’ Meeting of January 20, 2012
Comments from the Chair of the Board of Trustees
2. Report from the President
Committee Reports and Information Items and items apart from the Consent Agenda
University Resources Committee University Academics Committee Governance Committee Audit Committee Executive Committee
Consent Agenda Any trustee may request, in advance of action on the consent agenda, that any matter set out in this consent agenda be removed and placed on the regular agenda for discussion and action.
All matters listed within the Consent Agenda have been distributed to each member of the Ohio University Board of Trustees for reading and study, are considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion of the Board with no separate discussion.
Tab 1: Approval of the Minutes - Board of Trustees Meeting of January 20, 2012 Tab 14: Resolution, Construction Projects Tab 15: Resolution, Quasi Endowment Approval Tab 22: Resolution, Emeritus/Emerita Recommendations Tab 23: Resolution, Faculty Fellowship Awards Tab 24: Resolution, Renaming of Diabetes Endocrine Center to Diabetes Institute Tab 25: Resolution, Creation of Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine Tab 26: Resolution, School of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness Diabetes Certificate Tab 27: Resolution, Naming of Space, Café in the Academic Research Center Tab 28: Resolution, Meeting Dates for Succeeding Year Tab 32: Resolutions, Honorary Degrees
Unfinished Business
New Business
Communications, Petitions, and Memorials
Announcement of Next Stated Meeting Date
Adjournment
AGENDA University Academics and Resources Joint Committee Meeting Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104 12:30 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
3. FY 2013 Budget Update 4. Mineral Rights / HB133 Update
AGENDA University Resources Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125 2:00 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
5. Capital Campaign Update 6. Series 2012 Debt Issuance Update 7. Housing Development Plan Update 8. Facilities and Property Update 9. Socially Responsible Practices Ad Hoc Committee Update 10. OUHCOM Update Resolution, OhioHealth Definitive Agreement Resolution, UMA/AMA Merger 11. Resolution, City of Dublin 12. Resolutions, FY 2013 Tuition and Fee Approvals 13. Resolution, Mineral Rights 14. Consent Agenda, Construction Projects 15. Consent Agenda, Quasi Endowment Approval
AGENDA University Academics Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104 2:00 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
16. Academic Quality: College of Education - Program Accreditation/Learning Outcomes 17. Academic Quality: Program Review Revision Update 18. Academic Quality: Dashboard Review 19. Office of Information Technology Update 20. Quarters to Semesters Progress Report 21. Search Updates 22. Consent Agenda, Emeritus/Emerita Recommendations 23. Consent Agenda, Faculty Fellowship Awards 24. Consent Agenda, Renaming of Diabetes Endocrine Center to Diabetes Institute 25. Consent Agenda, Creation of Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine 26. Consent Agenda, School of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness Diabetes Certificate 27. Consent Agenda, Naming of Space, Café in the Academic Research Center
AGENDA Governance Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125 4:30 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
28. Consent Agenda, Meeting Dates for Succeeding Year 2012-2013 Nominations for Chair and Vice Chair Update on Student Trustee Selection Process Update on National Trustee Selection Process By-Law Revision Update
AGENDA Audit Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 127 4:30 p.m. - Thursday, April 19, 2012
29. Internal Audit Update 30. Upcoming FY12 Audit, Plante and Moran 31. University Risk Management Initiative Update
EXECUTIVE SESSION
AGENDA University Executive Committee Ohio University Inn, Wilson Room 7:30 a.m. - Friday, April 20, 2012
32. Consent Agenda, Honorary Degrees
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Resolution 2009 - 3114
Statement of Expectations for Members of the Board of Trustees of Ohio University
Adopted by the Board of Trustees on April 24, 2009
This Statement of Expectations is intended to provide guidelines and information to assist members of the Board of Trustees in fulfilling their roles and responsibilities in service to Ohio University and the citizens of the State of Ohio.
1. The Role of the Board
a. The Board of Trustees is the governing body of Ohio University. It is a body politic and corporate under Ohio law and has the right to sue and be sued. The General Assembly has conferred upon the Board the authority to: adopt rules for the governance of the institution; hire and supervise the President, faculty and staff; oversee university finances; and control university property and facilities.
b. The Board serves the citizens of the State of Ohio. It is responsible for ensuring that the university offers students an educational experience of the highest quality and produces research that provides economic and cultural benefits to the citizens of Ohio. It is also responsible for making efficient and effective use of state resources by working with the Governor, the Board of Regents and the other state universities through the University System of Ohio. c. The Board’s primary concerns are strategic governance and accountability. It should adopt a strategic plan designed to ensure the long-term fulfillment of the university’s teaching, research and service mission, monitor progress in achieving the plan’s goals and update the plan as necessary. It should provide oversight to protect the university’s fiscal integrity and make sure that the President, faculty and staff comply with all applicable laws and perform their responsibilities ethically and competently. d. The Board should adopt a procedure governing the creation and monitoring of corporate entities affiliated with the university. e. The Board should govern through the President and should refrain from becoming involved in day-to-day operations. f. The Board should recognize the important role that the principle of shared governance plays in institutions of higher education. It should seek input from faculty, staff and students and whenever possible incorporate their views into its decisions.
2. The Role of Individual Trustees
1 a. Members of the Board of Trustees are stewards of the public trust. They have a fiduciary obligation to act in the best interests of the university and the State of Ohio. They must adhere to the highest ethical standards and perform their university duties without regard to any personal interests they may have. Trustees should understand and comply with state ethics laws and keep themselves informed of developments in these laws. They should avoid situations that may give rise to even the appearance of a conflict of interest and promptly disclose any conflicts of interest that may occur. b. Trustees should understand that they serve the institution as a whole and are not advocates for any particular unit or constituency of the university. c. Student Trustees have a unique responsibility to ensure that the views of students are heard in Board deliberations. They should also share with other students the Board’s perspectives on University issues. In performing both of these functions, they should keep in mind the needs of all constituencies within the university. d. Service on the Board is a time consuming professional commitment. Trustees should attend all meetings of the Board and committees and should give notice to the Chair when they are unable to do so. Trustees should also make an effort to participate in conferences and other programs designed to educate and update Trustees and to attend commencements, convocations and other special events on campus. e. Trustees should be attentive during meetings and refrain from multitasking. They should treat the opinions of their colleagues on the Board as well as others participating in Board discussions with civility and respect and should be open to alternative points of view. They should respect and protect the confidentiality of matters discussed in executive sessions and should refrain from publicly or privately criticizing other Trustees or impugning their motives. f. Trustees should strive to make informed decisions based on an analysis of objective data. In their deliberations they should rely on the application of sound management principles and prudent business judgment. To ensure thorough consideration of Board decisions, they should review briefing materials and be prepared to actively participate in discussions. g. In order to make good decisions, Trustees need to engage in robust and thorough discussions of university issues in public meetings. Disagreements will occur and Trustees should seek productive ways to resolve them. Once a consensus is reached on an issue, all Trustees should respect the final decision of the Board. h. Trustees should keep themselves informed about issues and events at the local, state and national level that may affect the university and higher education in general. i. Trustees are encouraged to offer financial support to the university in accordance with their means.
2
j. Trustees should understand and comply with the Ohio Public Records and Open Meetings Laws and should keep themselves informed of developments in these laws.
3. The Board’s Relationship with the President
a. The Board delegates responsibility for all aspects of institutional management to the President. The Board and individual Trustees should refrain from involvement in operational matters except as necessary to fulfill their fiduciary duties. b. The Board and the President should agree on clearly defined institutional goals and strategies for achieving them. c. The Board should hold the President accountable for achieving institutional goals. Evaluation of the President should be an ongoing process with the Board offering candid and constructive feedback as necessary. In accordance with Board policy, formal evaluations should be conducted on a regular basis. d. The President reports to the Board as a whole and not to individual Trustees. Trustees who have concerns about the President’s performance should convey them to the Board Chair who will take appropriate action to address the concern. The Chair will report back to the Trustee who raised the concern in a timely manner.
e. Individual Trustees should develop a comfortable working relationship with the President. They are encouraged to interact with the President one-on-one as needed to share information, concerns or advice but they should remember that when they do so they are not speaking for the entire Board.
4. The Board’s Relationship with Internal Constituencies
a. Trustees are encouraged to interact informally with administrators, faculty and students, bearing in mind that they do so as individual members of the Board. They should avoid any statements that would give rise to the perception that they speak for the entire Board.
b. When interacting with faculty, staff and students, Trustees should not disclose matters deemed confidential by the Board in executive session, advocate for their personal position on university issues or criticize other members of the university community.
c. Trustees should submit requests for information about institutional issues to the Board Secretary who will facilitate a response from the appropriate university official.
d. Consistent with the principle of shared governance, the faculty, through the Faculty Senate, plays an active advisory role to the administration and the Board of Trustees on all academic matters, including but not limited to academic standards, research, admissions, curriculum and the granting of degrees. The Faculty Senate initiates policies relating to university-wide academic matters, the rights and responsibilities of faculty and faculty grievances. The Board should respect the role of the Senate in these areas and should also
3
consider advice from the Senate on matters of general concern to the university community.
e. The Board should encourage the President and administrators to involve individual faculty and students in the development of institutional goals and priorities. The active participation of faculty and students in these matters will give them a broader understanding of institutional governance and will enrich the Board’s understanding of faculty and student views on university issues.
5. Relationships with External Entities a. The Board Chair is the only Trustee authorized to make public statements on behalf of the entire Board. b. When asked to comment on Board actions or deliberations, Trustees may defer to the Chair or the President. If Trustees choose to speak publicly on issues relating to the university or higher education in general they should make it clear that they are stating their personal views and are not expressing the formal position of the Board or the university. c. When individual Trustees communicate with federal, state or local officials on issues relating to higher education, they should take care not to create the perception that they speak for the Board or the university unless they have been authorized by the Chair or the Board to do so. d. When individual Trustees are presented with concerns about university operations, these matters should be communicated to the President and/or the Chair. e. While Trustees should seek information and ask questions of others, they should refrain from publicly criticizing the President or other members of the University Community. Criticisms or concerns that Trustees may have about the President or other members of the University Community should be conveyed to the Chair who will determine the appropriate method for the Board to address the issue.
4
The Ohio University Board of Trustees By-Laws as Amended
Revised April 24, 2011
Revised February 10, 2010
Revised January 23, 2009
Revised February 8, 2008
Revised July 14, 1989
Revised June 23, 1990
Revised September 20, 2002
Revised December 17, 2004
Article I. Corporate Authority and By-Laws
Section 1. Since by Federal and State law, there shall be and forever remain in the said university, a body politic and corporate, by the name and state of The President and Trustees of the Ohio University in the name and style of The Ohio University. The Ohio University Board of Trustees, hereinafter referred to as the Board, chooses to be governed by these By-Laws and the applicable provisions of Ohio law.
Section 2. The adoption of these By-Laws by the Board automatically nullifies all previous By-Laws.
Section 3. No By-Laws shall be enacted, amended, or repealed, except by a majority vote (5 votes) of the Board, and then only after thirty (30) days notice of a proposed change has been given to all members.
Section 4. The Board is composed of nine Trustees and two student Trustees, all appointed by the governor of the State of Ohio in accordance with Section 3337.01 of the Ohio Revised Code. The Board shall also include two national Trustees and the chair of the Ohio University Alumni Association Board of Directors or his or her designee. One national Trustee shall be appointed by the Board for a term of one year beginning on July 1, 2010. One national Trustee shall be appointed by the Board for a term of three years beginning on July 1, 2010. Thereafter, both national Trustees shall serve terms of three years.
1
Section 5. The nine Trustees appointed by the Governor will hold voting privileges. The two student trustees, the two national trustees and the chair of the Ohio University Alumni Association Board of Directors may not vote on Board matters but their opinions and advice will be actively solicited and welcomed in Board deliberations.
Article II. Officers of the Board
Section 1. Officers of the Board shall be as follows:
(a) Chairperson
(b) Vice-Chairperson
(c) Secretary
(d) Treasurer
Section 2. The Chairperson shall preside at all meetings of the Board, and unless otherwise directed by the Board, shall have the authority to appoint members of and to fill vacancies on all standing and special committees. He or she shall serve as Chairperson of the Executive Committee. Subject to these By-Laws, he or she shall fix the date and time of all regular, special, and emergency meetings, and perform such other duties as may be pertinent to the office of the Chairperson.
Section 3. The Vice-Chairperson, in the absence or incapacity of the Chairperson, shall assume the duties and obligations of the Chairperson.
Section 4. The Secretary shall keep minutes of all Board meetings and shall promptly distribute copies to all Board members. He or she shall be responsible for the orderly preservation of all records pertaining to Board business, and shall perform all other duties usual to the office or imposed by the Chairperson or by Board action.
Section 5. The Treasurer shall be responsible for the fiscal management of the University, including supporting budget preparation, the preparation of all officially required financial reports, investments, coordination of audits with auditors, including federal and state auditors, relationships with financial reporting agencies, and all other financial responsibilities generally or specifically assigned by the Board or the President.
Article III. Election of Officers
Section 1. The Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Secretary, and Treasurer shall be elected annually by the Board.
Section 2. The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson shall each serve for one year and shall be eligible for re-election to their respective offices for a period up to three (3)
2 consecutive years. The Secretary and the Treasurer shall be eligible for annual election to these offices without a yearly limitation.
Article IV. The President and Presidential Duties
Section 1. On the basis of mutual good faith and any contractual relationship pointing to continuous service, the President of the University shall be elected from year to year, and shall be entitled at all times to one (1) year severance notice or one (1) year salary if terminated.
Section 2. The President shall attend all meetings of the Board and shall, in an advisory capacity, have a voice in its deliberations. He or she shall have the authority to initiate any subject at Board meetings.
Section 3. The President shall be responsible to the Board for the administration and discipline of the University.
Article V. Meetings
Section 1. Regular Meetings. The Board shall hold no fewer than five (5) regular meetings a year, with the date and time fixed in accordance with the provisions of Article II. Section 2.
Section 2. Special and Emergency Meetings. Special and emergency meetings may be held upon the call of the Chairperson or upon the written request of three (3) Board members to the Secretary.
Section 3. Notice of Meetings. The Secretary shall notify all Board members and the President at least five days in advance of all regular and special meetings and at least one day in advance of all emergency meetings. The policy designated "Notification Procedures for Meetings," which has been adopted by the Board pursuant to Revised Code Section 121.22, is hereby incorporated by reference into this section, and the Secretary shall carry out his or her responsibilities under that policy in accordance with its provision for all meetings.
Section 4. Attendance. It shall be the policy of the Board to require full attendance at all meetings of the Board and committees in accordance with Revised Code Section 3.17. Excuses for absence from meetings shall be communicated to the Secretary at least two (2) days before meetings. Persistent unreasonable absences in violation of Ohio law shall be cause, at the pleasure of the Chairperson, for reporting such delinquency to the appropriate authority of the State of Ohio.
Section 5. Quorum. For the purpose of doing business, a majority (5 voting Trustees) of the Board membership shall constitute a quorum; however, a vote of two-thirds (6 votes) of the voting Trustees shall be necessary to elect or remove a President; and a vote of a
3 majority (5 votes) of the voting Trustees shall be necessary to authorize the sale or lease of a University building or the planned demolition of a University building.
Section 6. Agenda. The Secretary shall consult with the chairs of the Standing Committees and then prepare a proposed agenda for each Regular Meeting. The proposed agenda shall be delivered to the President for his or her review and then to the Chairperson of the Board for final approval.
Article VI. Standing and Special Committees
Section 1. Standing Committees of the Board, consisting of no fewer than three (3) members each, shall be appointed annually or for longer terms by the Chairperson of the Board, and each Standing Committee shall consider and make recommendations for action by the Board on the various policy matters enumerated below as follows:
(a) University Academics. Responsibilities will include the academic plan; enrollment management; student life; intercollegiate athletics; diversity; research and technology transfer policies and activities; information technology; communications and marketing; academic appointments; promotion and tenure policies and procedures; academic program reviews; and awarding of degrees.
(b) University Resources. Responsibilities will include financial operations; business organization and practices; human resources; university advancement; relations with local, state, and federal legislative and administrative agencies; recommending of the schedule of tuition and fees; borrowing of funds; naming, location, planning, construction, and maintenance and renovation of the University’s facilities and grounds; the purchase, sale and lease of lands and buildings; reviewing and monitoring of all investments including the endowment; contract oversight on public utilities and other large contracts; and recommending of investment policy, advising the Board on investments and appointment of investment advisors to assure compliance with Section 3345.05 ORC.
(c) Audit. Responsibilities will include the oversight of the internal audit functions, annual or other periodic audits of financial operations, the recommendation of the appointment of an external audit firm to the Board of Trustees, the receipts of the reports of the internal auditor and the external audit firm, and the university’s accountability and compliance procedures.
(d) Governance. Responsibilities will include the recommendation of general governance policies and procedures, the nomination of Board officers and recommendation of candidates for future trustees and national trustees. At the last meeting in each fiscal year, the Committee shall review these Bylaws to determine whether any changes are appropriate and shall recommend any such changes to the Board of Trustees.
4
(e) Executive. Responsibilities will include consulting with the President on the appointment of executive officers and business not specifically assigned to another Standing or Special Committee.
Section 2. The Executive Committee shall be made up of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees and the Chairs of University Academics and University Resources Committees and have broad powers to act in all matters not deemed by the Chairperson of the Board and the President of the University as of importance to command the immediate attention of the entire Board. All actions of the Executive Committee shall be subject to approval by the Board, except those wherein the Board has delegated to the Executive Committee or the President full power to act for the Board.
Section 3. Special committees may be appointed by the Chairperson of the Board for the purpose as the Board may deem necessary.
Section 4. The Chairperson of the Board and the President or designee shall be ex-officio members of all Standing Committees and Special Committees; however, neither is eligible to serve as a voting member of a Standing or Special Committee, in his or her ex- officio capacity.
Article VII. Parliamentary Authority
Section 1. When not in conflict with any of the provisions of these By-Laws, the Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the proceedings of the Board.
5
Board of Trustees Ohio University
Minutes
January 20th, 2012
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF OHIO UNIVERSITY
January 20, 2012
Wagner Theater Ohio University, Lancaster Campus THE OHIO UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MINUTES OF MEETING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Approval of the November 18, 2011 Minutes ...... 1
Reports Chair’s Report ...... 1 President’s Report ...... 3
University Resources Committee
University Resources Committee Minutes ...... 8
University Academics Committee
University Academics Committee Minutes ...... 10
Governance Committee
Governance Committee Minutes ...... 13
Audit Committee
Audit Committee Minutes ...... 14
Executive Committee
Executive Committee Minutes ...... 14
Approval of Consent Agenda ...... 14 Construction Projects, Resolution 2012-3254 Building Renaming, Resolution 2012-3255 Naming of Lounge in Baker, Resolution 2012-3256
Unfinished Business
New Business
Communications, Petitions, and Memorials
Announcement of Next Stated Meeting Date
Appendices
A President’s Report B University Resources Committee C University Academics Committee D Governance Committee E Audit Committee F Executive Committee
CALL TO ORDER Chairperson C. Robert Kidder called the January 20, 2012 meeting of the Ohio University Board of Trustees to order at 10:22 a.m.
Chair Kidder requested that the Board Secretary, Thomas E. Davis, call the role.
ROLL CALL Present—Chairperson C. Robert Kidder, Vice-Chairperson Gene T. Harris, Trustees Sandra J. Anderson, David A. Wolfort, Kevin B. Lake, Norman “Ned” Dewire, and David Brightbill.
Not Present— Janetta King and Alumni Representative Arlene Greenfield.
Also in attendance were President Roderick J. McDavis, National Trustees Henry Heilbrunn and Frank Krasovec, Student Trustees Danielle Parker and Allison Arnold, and Board Secretary Thomas E. Davis.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Chair Kidder asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the Nov. 18, 2011 meeting of the Ohio University Board of Trustees. No discussion or amendments were noted, Trustee Harris moved to accept the minutes. The motion seconded by Trustee Anderson and carried by unanimous vote.
Report from the Chair of the Board of Trustees Chair Kidder thanked the leadership team from Ohio University-Lancaster for their preparation, facilities, food, and hospitality during this meeting on their campus.
Chair Kidder offered comments regarding the comprehensive evaluation of President McDavis. This process is nearing its conclusion and Chair Kidder gave an overview of the entire process along with the resulting conclusions.
Chair Kidder reported that Dr. Terry MacTaggart, a consultant from the Association of Governing Bodies (AGB), was commissioned to serve as an outside consultant as a part of the President McDavis’ comprehensive evaluation. Dr. MacTaggart completed an independent review with invitations to participate being extended to approximately 65-70 stakeholders of Ohio University including staff, faculty, administrators, students, alumni, trustees, and community members. Dr. MacTaggart completed a draft report which was shared with all trustees present at this Board meeting. Chair Kidder and Vice-Chair Harris met with President McDavis to discuss his views on the challenges facing Ohio University, his reaction to the report by Dr. MacTaggart, and his willingness to tackle the high priorities set forth by the Board. Chair Kidder conducted discussions with each Board
1 member to gain a perspective on President McDavis’ capability to continue along with challenges that need to be tackled in the following years.
During the Executive Session yesterday, Chair Kidder reviewed the report of Dr. MacTaggert, the perspective of President McDavis, and the cumulative views of each trustee.
President McDavis’ performance was reviewed based upon Ohio University’s gains in enrollment, engagement, RCM processes, financial discipline, student awards, team building, student reviews, success in the CIP campaign, transitions in academic quality, and his passion. A number of working objectives (8-9) were formed out of this conversation that will be revised and included in President McDavis’ new contract:
1) Develop a continued focus on academic quality which includes the evolution of the general education initiative, increased use of dashboard academic performance ratings, strengthening Ohio University’s rankings, building the Ohio University brand for academic excellence to offset any other brand that may exist, and a continuation of the evolution of student engagement through learning communities. All of which are important to create the academic climate of Ohio University.
2) Successfully complete the Promise Lives campaign which is well on its way to being accomplished. Chair Kidder mentioned a larger goal of $500 million might be within reach.
3) Continue the strategic enrollment plan focusing on international, national, and diverse students at all campuses of Ohio University.
4) Implement the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that was approved during the November Board meeting which will help keep the facilities fit for the purpose of engaging student learning communities.
5) Evolve the initiatives of the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine (OUHCOM) which includes expanding into the Columbus market.
6) Continue to support the financial disciplines that include responsible financing plans, six year plans, and increased understanding of sources and uses along with the implementation of RCM.
7) Continue to respond to the hard task of government cutbacks in funding.
8) Continue to build strong relationships with faculty, alumni, staff, and administration. Chair Kidder identified one area of concern in the evaluation was 2
the need for a complete commitment and alignment with the strategic vision. He expressed the need to work closely with the community to find a definition that works and helps Ohio University capitalize on the tremendous gains that have already been made.
9) Begin venture funding to benefit the region and support faculty research.
Chair Kidder announced that the Board of Trustees decided to renew President McDavis’ contract. These objectives will be drafted into President McDavis’ new contract which will be brought forward during the April meeting of the Board of Trustees.
Chair Kidder asked for comments.
Trustee Harris indicated that although this is an evaluation of the President, it is also an evaluation of the entire Ohio University community. She shared her congratulations to the Ohio University community and highlighted the gains and progress made during her eight year term as a trustee.
Chair Kidder asked for the President’s report.
Report of the President
Strategic priority spotlight President McDavis thanked Chair Kidder and gave an overview of his presentation which included short- and long-term enrollment goals, an update on international relations, Ohio’s recognition as a military friendly school, the program spotlight on the Lancaster campus Deaf Studies and Interpreting program, and points of pride.
He emphasized and reviewed the need for a continued focus on Ohio University’s vision, to be the nation’s best transformative learning community, the four fundamentals, and the four supporting strategic priorities. All of which were included in the materials.
President McDavis reviewed the strategic enrollment management plan and referenced the chart on page 75 of the Board materials. He reported that the decision to invest in recruitment is paying off. He cited the increase in overall applications this year recently broke the application record set in 2009. President McDavis further noted that current applications far surpass those of 2009 which wasn’t set until June. President McDavis indicated that Ohio University has admitted 45% more students compared to this time last year which allows for more conversations about getting students to campus sooner to learn about opportunities, scholarships, and communicate directly with faculty. The most encouraging growth was seen in the targeted markets. A significant increase in the percentage of applications/admission was shown in international (73/200), multicultural 3
(86/92), out of state (100/73), and transfer students (10/183). President McDavis acknowledged that these numbers represent a commitment to bringing quality students to Ohio University and not just increasing numbers. He reviewed the anticipation for another great class this fall and thanked Executive Vice-President and Provost (EVPP) Benoit and Craig Cornell for their leadership in this effort.
President McDavis updated the Board on international relations. Along with Dan Weiner, Bryan Benchoff, and Graham Stewart, President McDavis visited Hong Kong and Malaysia in December to meet with academic partner institutions, cultivate relationships with supporters of Ohio University’s academic mission, and engage with alumni and friends. He reported talking with UITM, which is the state institution in Malaysia with over 250,000 students. He reported that they are very interested in forming partnerships. They also met with colleagues at Hong Kong Baptist and they are interested in renewing the relationships and collaborative programs that already exist. He reported they also brought back a $750,000 check from the Sime Darby Foundation to support Ohio University’s Southeast Asian Studies Tun Abdul Razak Chair. This gift will enhance the national prominence and influence of the Razak Chair by providing seminars, workshops, and lectures about Malaysia throughout the United States. President McDavis noted there are 2400 Ohio University alumni in Malaysia and 600 alumni in Hong Kong. Nearly 300 alumni attended the event in Malaysia and a little more than 100 in Hong Kong. President McDavis hopes that continuing to build these relationships with follow-up contacts will lead to additional donors. President McDavis thanked Dr. Weiner for his leadership.
President McDavis reported the G.I. Jobs magazine recently recognized Ohio University as a Military Friendly school due to the new services, improved communication, and enhanced partnerships with off-campus groups that helps students who are veterans be successful. President McDavis commended Dr. David Descutner’s leadership team.
Program Spotlight President McDavis asked Ohio University-Lancaster campus’ Deaf and Interpreting Studies representatives forward. This group included Jim Smith, Dean of Ohio University- Lancaster, Dr. Becky Brooks, Interim Program Coordinator and Instructor, Lori Woods, Jonathan Sheline, Student and Ohio University-L ASL Club President, and Cynthia Dobronyi, Interpreter. President McDavis introduced Dean Smith to set the context for this presentation.
Dean Smith thanked the Board for the opportunity to talk about the Deaf and Interpreting Studies program. He reviewed the history of the program which started at Ohio University-Chillicothe. After collaborating with the Dean of Ohio University-Chillicothe, they learned that approximately 90% of the students in the program listed Ohio University- Lancaster as their home campus and relocated to Ohio University-Chillicothe for the program. Therefore, the program was moved to Ohio University-Lancaster to better serve 4 these students. In addition, Columbus has the sixth largest community of individuals that are deaf and hearing impaired. Dean Smith then introduced Dr. Brooks to share her perspectives on how this program impacts the community.
Dr. Brooks reported that on average 45% of Americans make New Year’s resolutions, but only around 8% actually complete their resolution. She highlighted that some of these resolutions are focused on paying it forward and despite not meeting the goal; people continue to strive to give back. Dr. Brooks cited that this is the philosophy of the Deaf and Interpreting Studies program at Ohio University-Lancaster. She reported their goal is to give back and pay it forward with a focus on making life accessible to everyone regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, age, or ability. She also highlighted their focus on fostering collaborative relationships that bridge the gap between people who hear and people who don’t.
Dr. Brooks reviewed a number of events in which Ohio University-Lancaster students help pay it forward by interpreting at activities in the community which allows individuals with hearing impairments to fully participate and enjoy them. Students recently interpreted a play, Tecumseh, which was an 81 page document, some of which was in Shawnee. This allowed members of the deaf community to enjoy the play. She also reported the ASL Club helped organize the first deaf awareness day at COSI. Students worked hard to make the shows accessible to people with hearing impairments and over 200 were in attendance. She shared a story about two Sign-I students that were signing back and forth about never having met a deaf person. Two members of the deaf community in the audience saw this and proceeded to have a dialogue with these students, completely in sign. Dr. Brooks stated this experience underscores their philosophy within the program; to pave a way to open access by donating time, talents, and resources that bridge the hearing and deaf worlds. Interpreting students also get involved with the local community and have interpreted the Lancaster men’s chorus production entitled Ham and Eggs for the past two years.
Dr. Brooks reported the students and ASL Club worked with the cultural events committee to bring two dynamic performers to Ohio University-Lancaster. Keith Wann, a comedian who is hearing, but born to deaf parents, showed how comedy can bridge cultural divides. C.J. Jones, a deaf comedian, also performed and gave a workshop for theatre and interpreting students. Both events nearly packed the house. She expressed her pride in the hard work of students and community members that have helped bring the hearing and deaf communities together, increase cultural awareness, and learn invaluable communication skills.
Dr. Brooks then introduced her colleague, Lori Woods, whom she reported is commonly reported to be one of the students’ favorite instructors. Lori has a Master’s in ASL Instruction from Ohio State University, has been teaching ASL for over 15 years, served as 5 past-President of the Ohio American Sign Language Teacher’s Association and holds the highest certification in teaching ASL.
Lori introduced Cynthia Dobronyi, Interpreter, who voiced for her presentation which was delivered using ASL. Lori described the typical ASL student and the organization of classrooms. Lori reported it is important to organize the class in the shape of a “U” because no spoken English is used in the classroom. Students learn much better through this type of immersion which also helps students to learn the grammatical structure and vocabulary. She stated that students often report that four hours a week isn’t enough and most students want additional experiences. Because of the impact this immersion has on the student’s proficiency, they get together with other branch campuses, holding silent events, and give back to the community. This led to the development of ASL Clubs at each branch campus. This coordination led to a number of silent-events where no English is spoken. These silent events included silent bowling, a silent Halloween costume party, and ASL Idol. Each event was well attended by community members and students both with and without hearing impairments.
Ms. Woods reported on the many student engagement activities in which ASL students can take part. Ms. Woods concluded her comments with a quote by Nelson Mandela: "If you speak to a man in a language he understands, he’ll understand it with his head. But if you speak to a man in his own language – he’ll understand in his heart."
Ms. Woods then opened up the floor for questions and asked the student president of the ASL Club, John Shelin, forward.
Chair Kidder asked if there are other dialects of ASL.
Lori reported that each language has their own sign language, grammar, and vocabulary, just like the spoken versions.
Chair Kidder then asked about accents. Lori reported that each region has distinct dialects and accents. People can tell where the person lives based upon the way they sign.
Trustee Harris reported her school district just began offering ASL as a foreign language option and asked about the curriculum at Lancaster.
Dr. Brooks reported it is an Associate’s degree that takes a little over two years. She also reported programs exist for students who are deaf as well.
Trustee Anderson inquired about the job prospects and continued communication with graduates. 6
Dr. Brooks reported some work in school systems, some free-lance, and one alumni works for Deaf Woman against Violence. She reported they keep open communication with most alumni and one had planned on attending this presentation, but was called out to sign at an event.
Trustee Krasovec asked about the prospects for medical research at Ohio University- Lancaster.
Dr. Brooks reported their focus has been on the cultural aspects of deafness and they are still a new program with hopes that continued exposure will help to attract research.
Chair Kidder asked how John Shelin was attracted to the program.
John reported it was by accident. He needed a foreign language credit to complete his history degree and was initially intimidated by Lori, being the first deaf person he knew, but quickly fell in love with the program.
Chair Kidder asked for questions. None noted. Chair Kidder thanked the group for their presentation which was followed by applause.
Points of Pride President McDavis then reviewed a number of points of pride for Ohio University.
President McDavis reviewed the excellence at Ohio University-Lancaster as evidenced by the slides in his presentation and reported by Dean Smith yesterday. He reported an Ohio University-eastern student, Kristina Velkovic, was named a state student ambassador by Ohio’s Board of Regents.
An Ohio University alumnus from the southern campus, Ernie Hall, received his first Emmy for his work as a photojournalist with Action News in Jacksonville, Florida.
The Ohio Bobcat football team won their first bowl game in the school’s history during the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl.
President McDavis acknowledged Trustee Harris and her recent award for the 2012 Ohio Superintendent of the Year.
President McDavis concluded his report.
Chair Kidder asked for questions. None noted.
7
Chair Kidder then introduced Trustee Anderson.
University Resources Committee Report Trustee Anderson reported on the work of the university resources committee. She thanked the Ohio University-Lancaster community for providing useful education, information, and hospitality during her visit for this Board meeting. She reported that, unlike at the last Board meeting where the Committee presented several important resolutions, the Committee heard primarily a series of updates and had no action items other than two resolutions on the consent agenda at tabs 5 and 6.
The consent agenda item at tab 5 involved construction projects to deal with maintenance, upkeep, and repair. Along with this came a report from the Vice President for Finance and Administration, Stephen Golding, about the budget for this project that will address the safety backlog which included an additional $2 million that has been identified.
The consent agenda item at tab 6 involved a building renaming at the Ohio University- Chillicothe campus.
Trustee Anderson provided a number of updates on previous action items. The resources committee received reports from Stephen Golding, VP for Finance and Administration, and Mr. Harry Wyatt, Associate Vice President for Facilities, regarding the Lausche heating plant replacement project. The team selected RFM to be a consultant on this project and Steve McAdams, RFM representative, was also present at the committee meeting. Trustee Anderson recognized the work of the team that has been studying this project. She reported a continued commitment to phasing out coal as a fuel source due to pending regulations. The committee was provided with a layout of the current heating system which uses mostly coal fired boilers with a small percentage of gas to heat the entire campus. Over the past 12 months, the total cost of heating the campus was nearly $3 million and if the University had been using gas, this fuel cost would have been closer to $5.9 million. The University currently has three coal fired boilers that are 47 years old and a natural gas fired boiler that is 17 years old. One of the coal boilers has been retrofitted with a gas burner, but is still an aged unit. All coal boilers are very old and in serious need of an update. The team looked at various sites for expanding the plant due to the congested space of the current location. The team considered the Ridges, but a number of cost and efficiency concerns related to the distance led the team to recommend a cogeneration system, generating electric from the production of steam, which is similar to what other campuses use and allows for more efficient use of energy. After investigating 22 different options, the team narrowed possibilities down to four and presented these options to the committee. A final recommendation is being developed that will include the purchase and installation of new packaged gas boilers and two turbines. This expansion would be twice the size of current plant. The preferred site for this project is the existing location with 8 relocation of Transportation and Parking Services which is currently on the same site. The cogeneration option provides long term benefits including carbon reduction and financial savings. The new boilers would have a life span of 35+ years and turbines 5-10 years, but this can be extended through maintenance packages provided by the vendors. The final portion of this plan is to explore financing options through tax credits, partnerships, and providing energy to other entities as a potential resource. Trustee Anderson reported there were no action items at this point.
Trustee Anderson provided an update from the committee regarding the performance contract project which is the highlight of the six year capital plan. AVP Wyatt informed the committee that three firms responded to the RFP and a contractor is very close to being selected with a proposed contract anticipated during the April Board meeting. This plan is expected to have a 15 year or less payback in energy savings.
VP Golding updated the committee on the state capital budget status. The Chancellor appointed Ohio State University President Gordon Gee to lead a joint committee of state universities to recommend how the $350 million in state capital funds will be used. IUC leadership will be speaking with each campus regarding their specific plans and the committee headed by Gordon Gee will present a single list of projects to the Governor and Chancellor on February 15th, 2012.
Trustee Anderson reviewed the update on the six-year sources and uses presented to the committee by Chad Mitchell, Interim Budget Director appointed in December, AVP Michael Angelini, and Controller Julie Allison. The plan is to reconcile the sources and uses document with the new budget document to enhance presentations and understanding by the Board. AVP Angelini walked the committee through the sources and uses forecast based on results through November 2011 highlighting significant variance between FY2011 actuals and the forecast for FY2012. AVP Angelini also presented the committee with a schedule to show the impact of the six-year CIP with additional information on FY2012 budget variance forecast.
VP Golding updated the committee on the debt issuance authorized during the November meeting of the Board. Rating agencies, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, came to campus on two separate days to complete their ratings. The University’s preparation and presentations to these agencies received rave reviews and the University is awaiting the final rating scores from these two agencies.
Dr. Jack Brose, Dean of the OUHCOM, updated the committee on the expansion project authorized during the November Board meeting. Negotiations are under-way and the plan is for the first class at the Columbus campus to begin in the fall of 2014. A memorandum of understanding was signed with the Cleveland Clinic with a site in the former Suburban Hospital in Cleveland, adjacent to the South Pointe Hospital. A 2nd year class would be set 9 for the fall of 2014. A healthcare integration project is being developed with O’Bleness Memorial Hospital, University Medical Associates, and Athens Medical Associates to enhance partnerships rather than competition. Plante Moran has been serving as a consultant on this project.
An update was given regarding the University Courtyard housing project by VP Golding, but no recommendation was made at this time and more information is to come.
Trustee Anderson concluded her comments with a report on the capital campaign given by Vice President for Advancement, Bryan Benchoff. As of yesterday, the campaign was at $382 million which is 85% of the total goal. VP Benchoff responded to the committee’s questions and provided a detailed chart of actual cash in the door compared to unrealized gifts/pledges and was compared to other institutions which indicated Ohio University is doing just fine. A report from the campaign steering committee was given and they plan to meet with volunteers to bring this campaign to the community.
Chair Kidder asked for questions. None were noted and introduced Trustee Dewire for the university academics committee report.
University Academics Committee Report Trustee Dewire reported on the work of the academics committee. He asked Pam Benoit, Executive Vice-President and Provost, to come forward.
Trustee Dewire began his report on tab 12 with a focus on the Russ College of Engineering and Technology. Although Dr. Dennis Irwin, Dean, was unavailable for the Board meeting, he gave a presentation during the committee meeting which focused on Russ College’s accreditation and a draft of their dashboard indicators. Background on their accreditation through ABET was reviewed. All of the college and programs in the Russ College have been accredited since 2011 and this will last through 2017. ABET doesn’t accredit colleges or departments, but only accredits individual programs. Russ College has five program objectives and 11 student outcomes which are continuously being measured and improved upon. This continuous evaluation incorporates data from over 200 faculty, student, alumni, constituents, and several industrial advisory board members. They take annual readings from students and advisory boards to develop a continuous loop of re- evaluating the curriculum. Dean Irwin provided the committee with examples of the Russ College’s 12 indicators on the academic dashboard and strategic planning process to become the top choice for students and faculty while raising the national ranking of the program into the top 25.
In reference to tab 13, Trustee Dewire gave an overview of the history of general education with a look at Ohio University’s curriculum in 1811 compared with 2011. General education is a national conversation about what students should know upon graduation 10 from a University. An evaluation of how Ohio University measures general education compared with best-practices at other institutions was provided. Provost Benoit gave a timeline to the committee and promised an enhanced approach to general education by 2015.
Dr. Hugh Sherman, Dean of the College of Business, and Dr. David Thomas, presented the committee with preliminary results from the 1804 General Education Task Force. This group researched models, approaches, and best-practices in general education. These models ranged from “great books” to “effective citizenship” paradigms. Dean Sherman highlighted the goal of the Ohio University general education program is to blend the models of “scholarly discipline” and “effective citizenship” to increase ways of knowing, doing, and being as general education is the common thread among all Ohio University students. The 1804 Task Force is compiling a final report that will be presented to EVPP Benoit.
In reference to tab 15, Provost Benoit updated the committee on the AQIP projects. There are currently three AQIP projects that include a review of the academic support unit, a comprehensive sustainability plan, and the quarter to semester transition calendar.
In reference to tab 16, Trustee Dewire introduced EVPP Benoit to discuss the deep dive on two dashboard ratings: student/faculty ratio and undergraduate head count. EVPP Benoit emphasized the importance of understanding how these numbers are calculated. The student/faculty ratio is calculated as a ratio of full-time students plus one-third part time FTE over full-time faculty plus one-third part-time faculty. EVPP Benoit reported this number is often interpreted as a measure of class size and student-faculty engagement, but these interpretations are inaccurate. She referenced MIT which has a faculty/student ratio of 8:1, but this number doesn’t mean class sizes are limited to eight students because there may be a number of faculty with little or no student engagement. Nonetheless, the student/faculty ratio accounts for 5% of the U.S. News and World Report rankings and is a useful marketing tool for recruitment. She reported Ohio University has a much more refined analysis which gives the University a better calculation in regards to instructional load broken down by colleges. She also reported the student/faculty data when used in conjunction with NSEE data can provide benchmarks for the University that captures student engagement.
Chair Kidder asked if there is any push to change the way these statistics are calculated.
Provost Benoit indicated this is hard to do because this is the way it has always been done. She reported the problem isn’t necessarily with the statistics, but with the way in which people interpret these statistics.
11
Trustee Harris noted there are so many more factors that go into student engagement that might not necessarily be in a traditional classroom.
Provost Benoit highlighted her earlier point that some faculty have little or no student engagement, but are still accounted for in the student/faculty ratio.
Chair Kidder asked EVVP Benoit to elaborate on the student engagement measure which was reported to be a more important factor at Ohio University.
EVPP Benoit reported this comes from the NSSE data and trend lines are moving well which distinguishes Ohio University and aligns with the four fundamentals. She reported that NSSE representatives recently visited the eight institutions that showed significant gains in student success and Ohio University was one of those.
EVPP Benoit then reported on the undergraduate head count at Ohio University. Undergraduate head count is calculated by the number of students enrolled full and part- time in the fall term of an academic year. She noted steady increases at Ohio University that are above the average for Ohio four-year institutions. Ohio University currently has the fifth highest undergraduate headcount in the state on the main campuses. Ohio University has the fifth largest total headcount including graduate and professional students in the state. When including regional campuses, Ohio University is fourth in total headcount. She reported that 82% of students are from Ohio, 11% are from out of the state, and 7% are international students. The colleges of Arts and Sciences have the largest headcount currently. The undergraduate headcount is important because of its influence on the University’s Carnegie classification which is crucial in recruitment of faculty. This Carnegie classification is redone every couple of years and Ohio is currently classified as “large” which also impacts student recruitment.
Chair Kidder asked for questions.
Trustee Krasovec asked where the students included in the e-learning numbers are coming from.
EVPP Benoit indicated a large number are from the region with the largest program being the nursing program. There are also strong numbers from completion programs and partnerships.
Trustee Krasovec reported his amazement with the fact Ohio University is teaching 35,000 students. He stated this number is the biggest he has ever seen.
EVPP Benoit indicated this is another way to diversify what the University is doing and preserving the brand and quality of programs. 12
Trustee Dewire then referenced a timely topic on tab 17, regarding institutional control of intercollegiate athletics. Jim Schaus, Athletic Director, and Tricia Turley Brandenburg, Senior Associate AD for Compliance and Student Services gave the committee an overview of compliance in the realm of Intercollegiate Athletics. Trustee Dewire expressed his pride in OU and the way it exercises institutional control. He reported 89 student athletes are on the Dean’s list, 232 are on the honor roll, 143 have a 3.5 or better, and 28 have a 4.0.
Trisha then reported on NCAA violations to the committee which stem from the 500 page NCAA rule book that is always changing. Of the 120 schools, there are only 17 with no major violations and Ohio University is one of those. They defined academic control and reviewed NCAA compliance protocol. They addressed communications of the rules and heard about title IX and gender equity at Ohio University.
Trustee Dewire reviewed the consent agenda item on tab 18 regarding the renaming of the Bobcat Lounge and concluded his comments.
Chair Kidder asked for questions. None noted.
University Governance Committee Report Trustee Brightbill reported on the work of the university governance committee. No actions were brought forward. The committee discussed the proposed meeting calendar for 2012. There was no feedback or conflict at this time and the final schedule will be brought for approval at the April meeting. A discussion regarding the procedure for selecting national trustees was discussed due to the end of National Trustee Krasovec’s tenure. Trustee Brightbill thanked Trustee Krasovec for his admirable service. Dr. Davis has had some discussion with President McDavis and VP Benchoff regarding possible replacements and the hope is to have further news at the April meeting. A reminder was given regarding the AGB conference in Washington, D.C. on April 21-24. Finally, a review of the bylaws and statement of expectations will be coming forward in April.
Trustee Brightbill concluded his comments.
Chair Kidder asked for questions.
Trustee Krasovec indicated it might be wise to consider a student trustee from a regional campus of Ohio University.
President McDavis reported there have been student trustees from regional campuses in the past and Secretary Davis indicated this student was actually from the Lancaster campus.
13
Trustee Brightbill and President McDavis both encouraged nominations for the national trustee position to be given to Secretary Davis.
Chair Kidder then turned to Trustee Wolfort.
University Audit Committee Report Trustee Wolfort reported on the work of the university audit committee. Kathy Gilmore, Chief Audit Executive, and Tressa Ries, Senior Auditor, presented the audit committee with an update on the internal audit activities since the last meeting. Ms. Ries updated the committee on special projects and the audit plan completion. Trustee Wolfort made special note of Kathy Gilmore’s pending retirement at the end of the month and thanked her for all of her hard work.
Linda Lonsinger, Chief Human Resource Officer, updated the committee on Human Resource’s role in compliance along with the 2011 Annual Report including a discussion on the University’s health care plan and leave benefits.
Trustee Wolfort reported he adjourned the committee meeting for two executive sessions which was seconded by Trustee Dewire and carried by unanimous vote. The first executive session was for the sole purpose of an audit conference conducted by an independent certified public accountants with officials of the public office that is the subject of the audit, pursuant to the provisions of R.C. 121.22 (G)(2). The second session was to discuss details relative to the security arrangements and emergency response protocols for a public body or a public office, if disclosure of the matters discussed could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the security of the public body or public office pursuant to the provisions of R.C. 121.22(G)(6).
Chair Kidder asked for questions. None noted.
Executive Committee
Chair Kidder indicated that his prior comments highlighted the work of the executive session.
Consent Agenda
Chair Kidder presented the Consent Agenda items to the Trustees for action. It is important to note that any trustee may request, in advance of action on the consent agenda, that any matter set out in this consent agenda be removed and placed on the regular agenda for discussion and action. All matters listed within the consent agenda have been distributed to each member of the Ohio University Board of Trustees for reading and study, are
14 considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion of the Board with no separate discussion.
Chair Kidder called for a motion to approve the remaining items on the consent agenda on tabs 5, 6, and 18. Trustee Dewire moved, Trustee Brightbill seconded, and the motion carried by unanimous vote.
APPROVAL OF PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO DEVELOP CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS FOR FY 2012 SOUTH GREEN CATWALK REPAIR, FY 2012 SOUTH GREEN FRONT FOUR PATIO REPAIR, AND FY 2012 RESIDENCE HALL EXTERIOR PAINTING
RESOLUTION 2012 - 3254
WHEREAS, three capital projects have been planned and developed as follows:
FY 2012 South Green Catwalk Repair with a total project budget of $740,000 to be funded from Residential Housing Reserve, and
FY 2012 South Green Front Four Patio Repair with a total project budget of $1,550,000 to be funded $755,000 from Culinary Services Reserve and $795,000 from Residential Housing Reserve, and
FY 2012 Residence Hall Exterior Painting with a total project budget of $550,000 to be funded from the Residential Housing Reserve, and
WHEREAS, the projects identified above have been planned, developed and funded.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees authorizes the receipt of bids and the President or his designee to accept and award construction contracts within the total project budgets identified.
15
NAMING OF “TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER”
RESOLUTION 2012 - 3255
WHEREAS, the Technical Studies Building on the Chillicothe Campus of Ohio University (Building #1103) has been expanded by 6000 square feet; and
WHEREAS, the function of the building has been broadened to not only include the campus’ technology degrees such as Law Enforcement Technology and Office Technology, but also hosting classes for the completion of associates and applied management degrees; and
WHEREAS, the function of the building will ultimately include courses, workshops, seminars and consulting in support of entrepreneurship activities as well as to house a small business incubator; and
WHEREAS, the name “Technology and Business Development Center,” has been determined to be a more appropriate name for the expanded building by the faculty and staff of the Chillicothe Campus.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that hence forth Building #1103 on the Chillicothe campus of Ohio University will be named TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER.
NAMING OF THE LOWER LEVEL LOUNGE, JOHN CALHOUN BAKER UNIVERSITY CENTER BOBCAT STUDENT LOUNGE
RESOLUTION 2012 – 3256
WHEREAS, the lower level lounge (Room 105) in the John Calhoun Baker University Center has been completely remodeled to meet the programming needs of OHIO students and;
WHEREAS, the students have taken a survey and selected this name and;
WHEREAS, The Vice President of Student Affairs, in collaboration with Student Senate, recommend that the Board of Trustees approve the naming of the lounge.
16
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the lower level lounge (Room 105) on the first floor of the John Calhoun Baker University Center, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, will henceforth be named the Bobcat Student Lounge.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
None
COMMUNICATIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS
Chair Kidder then echoed Trustee Wolfort’s acknowledgment of Kathy Gilmore, Chief Audit Executive, going back to his tenure with the audit committee. He highlighted the extraordinary improvement of the department under her leadership. Chair Kidder then asked President McDavis to read the resolution.
The resolution was approved by acclimation. President McDavis then asked Ms. Gilmore to come forward to receive the copy of the resolution.. Applause followed.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEXT STATED MEETING DATE
Secretary Davis indicated that the next Board of Trustees meeting will be held on April 19- 20, 2012 at the campus of Ohio University.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Kidder adjourned the meeting at 12:00pm
CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY Notice of this meeting and its conduct was in accordance with Resolution 1975-240 of the Board, which resolution was adopted on November 5, 1975, in accordance with Section 121.22(F) of the Ohio Revised Code and of the State Administration Procedures Act.
______C. Robert Kidder Thomas E. Davis Chairperson Secretary 17
President’s Report
presented to Ohio University Board of Trustees April 20, 2012 • Vision Ohio: Top Strategic Priorities Supporting Innovation :: The Ohio University and The Ohio State University Partnership • Intercollegiate Athletics • Points of Pride • Program Spotlight Ohio University Forensics Team FOUR FUNDAMENTALS 1. Inspired teaching and research dedicated to students’ academic success and focused on the connections between student learning and the advancement of knowledge and 1. Inspired teaching and research creative activity. 2. Innovative academic programs that 2. Innovative academic programs draw on the best traditions and 3. Exemplary student support services practices in liberal arts, professional, and interdisciplinary education. 4. Integrative co‐curricular activities 3. Exemplary student support services committed to helping students fulfill their academic promise. Short‐ & Improve Complete 4. Integrative co‐curricular activities that Effective Total Long‐Term Financial Capital foster a diverse environment of respect Compensation Enrollment Strength Campaign and inclusivity and facilitate students’ Goals development as citizens and leaders. Supporting Innovation
• We established a very INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT unique partnership with THE OHIO UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION Ohio State to create a new $15 MILLION commercialization and THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY funding model that will pave $20 MILLION the way for high value start‐ ups, via early‐stage seed and venture capital funding Supporting Innovation
• This new partnership will leverage substantial university resources and assets in bringing the best talent, funding, and facilities to the State of Ohio to jumpstart entrepreneurial activity and venture creation • Our hope is to move more innovations to the marketplace to cure disease, produce healthier food, and advance alternative energy solutions • This effort is in line with the Ohio Board of Regents’ Technology Transfer and Commercialization Task Force Supporting Innovation
• Fund is in Ohio for Ohio! – Will enhance economic development by providing additional sources of capital critical to the commercialization eco system – Will attract and keep intellectual capital in Ohio – Will help create and keep jobs in Ohio – Will provide opportunities for collaboration between public and private entities, university and businesses National Intercollegiate Athletics Prominence • First Sweet 16 appearance since 1964 • OHIO men’s basketball team’s success brought significant national media attention to Ohio University • Articles appeared in The New York Times, ESPN, USA Today, the Chicago Tribune, The Washington Post, The Huffington Post, the Plain Dealer, and the Columbus Dispatch to name a few • That interest has translated to a spike of visitors to the Ohio University Web site • Final 2011‐12 ESPN/USA Today men’s basketball coaches poll –OHIO ranked 25th! National Prominence
NCAA Tournament period :: March 15‐19, 2012 vs. March 17‐21, 2011*
*The time period is the last Friday of the winter quarter examination period through Monday of spring break week
MAC Tournament period:: March 7‐14, 2012 vs. March 9‐16, 2011**
**The time period includes the Wednesday of the last week of winter quarter classes through Wednesday of the final examination period. Nation’s Best Transformative Learning Points of Pride Community
The College of Fine Arts celebrates its 75th Anniversary Nation’s Best Transformative Learning Points of Pride Community • The John J. Kopchick, Ph.D., Osteopathic Heritage Foundation Endowed Eminent Research Chair was established in honor of Dr. John Kopchick, himself the Milton and Lawrence H. Goll Eminent Scholar and Professor in Molecular and Cellular Biology Nation’s Best Transformative Points of Pride Learning Community • A team of Russ College of Engineering and Technology students won the Institute of Navigation's annual autonomous snowplow competition in St. Paul, Minnesota – Team M.A.C.S. beat out Miami University, the University of Michigan at Dearborn, the University of Minnesota, and Dunwoody College of Technology Photo courtesy of: Institute of Navigation, North Star Section Nation’s Best Transformative Learning Points of Pride Community • Former New York and Los Angeles police chief William J. Bratton served as the keynote speaker for the 2012 Baker Peace Conference, which was themed “Crime and Punishment: Security Domestic Tranquility in the 21st Century” Nation’s Best Transformative Learning Points of Pride Community
• OHIO Swimming and Diving has been recognized as the top Mid‐Major program in the country by CollegeSwimming.com
Photo courtesy of: www.ohiobobcats.com Nation’s Best Transformative Learning Points of Pride Community
• Alumna Sonya Hebert joined the White House photography staff and will cover the First Lady in addition to other assignments Scott Titsworth, Interim Dean, the Scripps College of Communication Dan West, the John A. Cassese Director of Forensics Speaking Bobcats :: Jamie Zipfel ∙ Brett Martz Ohio University’s Speaking and Debating Bobcats | Ohio Statehouse | March 28, 2012 Ohio University’s Speaking and Debating Bobcats | Ohio Statehouse | March 28, 2012 Ohio University’s Speaking and Debating Bobcats | Ohio Statehouse | March 28, 2012 President’s Report
presented to Ohio University Board of Trustees April 20, 2012
AGENDA University Academics and Resources Joint Committee Meeting Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104 12:30 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
3. FY 2013 Budget Update 4. Mineral Rights / HB133 Update
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: President McDavis and Board of Trustees
From: Pam Benoit, Executive Vice President and Provost Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration, CFO and Treasurer
Re: FY’13 Budget Update
At the April Board of Trustees meeting, several resolutions will be presented to increase our tuition and fees for Fiscal Year 2012-13 (see Appendix D for a summary of the proposed tuition and fee increases). In presenting these resolutions, we are mindful of the need to strike a balance between maintaining affordability and ensuring the university’s ability to offer a quality education to all students.
This memo outlines our planning efforts, our projections for revenues and inflationary cost increases, and our current working list of strategic investments.
Maintaining Access and Affordability Access and affordability remain an important part of the university’s mission. Even with the proposed tuition and fee increase we are confident that we will be able to assist students with financial need to attend Ohio University.
Our confidence is based on the success we have had to date in helping students to afford an Ohio University degree. In AY 2010-2011, the published “sticker price” for university tuition/fees was $9,936. However, for the 92% of the undergraduate students who demonstrated need, the average financial aid award for grants/scholarships and the standard student loan was $8,247 or 83% of the total cost, leaving an out-of-pocket cost of $1,689.
Our affordability efforts are also reflected in our comparative standing when it comes to student loan indebtedness. In AY 2010-2011, Ohio University had the 3rd lowest student loan indebtedness of our peer institutions in the state of Ohio.
A portion of the requested increase would be applied directly to financial aid thereby allowing us to hold the line on out-of-pocket costs for students and their families with demonstrated need.
Promoting Excellence An Ohio University undergraduate education has two distinguishing features. First, our educational efforts are tied a rural residential experience (in the case of the Athens campus) or a rural community-based experience (in the case of the regional campuses). Second, the level of
1 student engagement provided by our faculty and staff is remarkable for a large public university. Both of these Ohio University hallmarks cannot be maintained at the expected level of excellence in the face of additional budget reductions.
Over the past decade, state support, the mainstay of the university’s budget, has declined. A cycle of annual budget rescissions has followed in the wake of this decline. As illustrated in the graph below, Ohio University has implemented significant budget reductions since 2002 to offset these budget pressures.
While past budget reductions have allowed the university to maintain a balanced budget, to ensure the quality of our academic mission and student experience, our strategy for the future will be to grow and diversify our revenue streams to offset budget pressures. The University will continue to pursue growth in revenues, such as fundraising, increasing enrollment, and development of high demand academic programs.
While we have been successful in many of these endeavors, we have not been able to avoid an increased reliance on tuition and fees. Ohio University is not alone. Many other public institutions that were once supported by their states are now dependent on tuition and fees to make up lost revenues.
When faced with declining state support, rising costs for health care and utilities, and the need to maintain a safe and effective infrastructure, the university must look to an increase in tuition and fees. The proposed increase will protect academic excellence by supporting critical areas aligned with our 4X4 strategic planning approach. Areas targeted for investment include:
Student advising. Improvements in information technology needed to support students, faculty, and staff. Instructional capacity to meet student demand. Student financial aid. Vital student recruitment and retention activities. Student programming that supports personal and career development. A raise pool to promote the retention of quality faculty and staff.
2 Each of these investments will allow us to remain accountable to the students who have chosen to build their futures on the foundations of an Ohio University degree.
An increase in tuition and fees does not lessen the university’s responsibility to become more efficient. Those efforts must continue. However, the proposed increase will give units the flexibility they need to develop creative ways of promoting academic excellence in a new internal and external budget environment. Likewise, the proposed increase will help us to manage institutional risks more effectively as we engage in the process of shaping what a residential or community-based education with a high degree of faculty and staff engagement will look like in the future.
More detailed information about the proposed FY 2013 tuition and fee increase and critical budgetary factors can be found in the following appendices:
Appendix A: State Support for Higher Education and Its Impact on Student Tuition Appendix B: Cost Factors Appendix C: Affordability and Access Appendix D: Proposed FY 2013 Tuition and Fee Increases
Appendix A: State Support of Higher Education & Impact on Student Tuition
The University has two primary sources of revenues to support annual operations and provide resources to invest in new programs and initiatives – State Support for Instruction and tuition. Over the last decade – or more – the relationship between these revenues has seen a fundamental shift.
As the US economy has slowly rebounded from the recession of 2008, state support of higher education has decreased substantially nationwide. This decrease in tuition subsidy has increased the reliance on student tuition to fund university operations.
This has occurred during a period of enrollment expansion, both at Ohio University and nationally. Increased enrollments have added cost pressures in areas of instructional capacity, student services, and classroom and administrative space. Some universities have dealt with these pressures by imposing enrollment caps, thereby restricting access to students wanting to attend a public institution.
The graph below illustrates the decline in state subsidy to Ohio University in nominal dollars (the value in the year earned) and constant dollars (adjusted for inflation) during a period of increasing enrollment.
3 Subsidy Revenue vs. Enrollment 21,000 $120,000
20,500 $100,000
20,000 $80,000
Total Athens 19,500 $60,000 Enrollment Subsidy ‐ 19,000 $40,000 Nominal $ Subsidy ‐ Constant $ 18,500 $20,000
18,000 $0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
As illustrated in the graph below, the reliance on tuition to support university operations has grown both at Ohio University and nationally. However, the gap between Ohio University’s reliance on tuition and the national average is shrinking.
The graph below shows Ohio University’s trend of state subsidy and tuition in nominal terms and real (constant) terms. Two trends are apparent:
o Since the Ohio Board of Regents enacted the tuition freeze in FY’08 & FY’09 and the subsequent 3.5% cap, tuition revenue has increased marginally in real terms.
o Since 2002, Ohio University has experienced a decrease in SSI of ~20% in real terms.
4 Subsidy vs. Tuition Revenue $300,000
$250,000 Tuition & Fees ‐ Nominal $200,000 Value
$150,000 Tuition & Fees ‐ Real Value
$100,000 Subsidy ‐ Nominal Value
$50,000 Subsidy ‐ Real Value $‐
Appendix B: Cost Factors for Ohio University
In recent years Ohio University’s budget has grown at a rate below the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI)1 despite uncontrollable inflationary increases in certain categories. Our ability to remain below HEPI is primarily due to management intervention to control costs and reduce administrative overhead.
OU Budget Growth vs HEPI & CPI
$400,000,000
OU Annual Budget $350,000,000 34.6% HEPI growth 30.8% CPI growth 23.0 $300,000,000
$250,000,000 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
Two other significant drivers of expense growth over the last 10 years have been healthcare and utility expenses (see graph below).
1 HEPI is an inflation index designed to track the main cost drivers in higher education. HEPI measures a market- basket of goods relevant to universities: faculty and staff compensation, utilities, supplies/materials, and service costs.
5 o Healthcare industry projections indicate continuation of 4% to 5% expense growth over the next 10 years. o Over a 4-5 year period, the University will need to invest an additional $6M-$7M to fund a new heating plant and the transition from coal to natural gas.
Healthcare and Utility Expense Growth 45,000,000 40,000,000 Healthcare 35,000,000 3.81% Average 30,000,000 Utilities 25,000,000 20,000,000 Linear 15,000,000 4.17% Average (Healthcar 10,000,000 e) 5,000,000 ‐
6
Appendix C: Affordability and Access While the change in the relationship between SSI and tuition support for the budget has put added pressure on students and their families, the University has worked diligently to insure that Ohio remains accessible to students who want to attend. As the following charts highlight, even in the face of increasing tuition and fees, Ohio remains competitive in meeting the needs of students with demonstrated need.
In comparison to the 2011-12 tuition/fees and room/board costs for other 4-year public institutions in Ohio, Ohio University’s listed rates remain at the 3rd highest in the state. Ohio University’s variance from the median of all tuition/fee and room/board costs for other 4-year public institutions in Ohio is only 4.5% for FY 2012, in comparison to a 10.44% variance from the median in FY 2011. By keeping room and board rate increases lower than other universities, Ohio University made significant improvements in FY 2012 toward offering costs that are more favorable compared with the costs of other 4-year public institutions in Ohio.
7
Ohio University undergraduate students with demonstrated need have a much higher likelihood of being awarded a need-based scholarship or grant at Ohio University compared to the other universities The 92% fulfillment of need-based scholarships or grants demonstrates Ohio University’s commitment to open-access and affordability
8
Ohio University has the 3rd lowest average indebtedness for students who borrow in comparison to the top 8 4-year public institutions in the state of Ohio for 2010-11. Though Ohio University’s tuition/fees and room/board costs are the 3rd highest in the state, the ability to provide financial aid helps reduce the average indebtedness for Ohio University students. Their indebtedness is the 3rd LOWEST in the state in comparison to the top eight 4-year public institutions in Ohio.
Regional Campus Affordability The community-based experience at regional campuses is based on a different model then the residential experience on the Athens campus. Their cost structure, in terms of faculty and facilities, allows them to provide a quality education at an affordable cost for students who want to complete part or all of their academic work close to home. The regional campuses have been successful at controlling expenses but without a modest increase in tuition and fees they cannot keep up with fixed costs such as utilities, health care, and infrastructure maintenance and continue to provide an excellent education.
9 OHIO FY 2011 Undergraduate Tuition and Fee Comparison $3,500 $3,179
$3,000 $2,648 $2,500 Athens Campus
$2,000 Regional Campuses $1,503 $1,525 $1,500
$1,000 $531 $500
$22 $‐ *Based on student enrollment Instructional Fees General Fees Resident Total in 11‐20 credit hours
10
Appendix D: Proposed FY 2013 Tuition and Fee Increases At the April meeting, we are proposing a resolution to increase Athens Campus undergraduate tuition by 3.5% - adding $5.7 million to the budget. While much consideration was given to holding the rate increase below the cap level, it was determined that our investment needs greatly outweigh our ability to fund them. Our enrollment goal includes a 1% increase to Athens Campus enrollments, but similar to SSI, we must build in an appropriate level of conservatism when finalizing the tuition revenue budget.
At this juncture, we still have an unbalanced budget and will be having further discussions with the Budget Planning Council and campus constituent groups to consider the tradeoffs needed to bring about a balanced budget.
The chart below provides a summary of our working list of strategic investments for the Athens Campus budget, totaling $15.7 million. The list includes:
Budget True-ups: prior year items that were not base funded; multi-year funding for Heating Plant replacement (capital & operating expenses). Effective Employee Compensation: raises for Faculty & Staff; increases in employer share of healthcare. Strategic Investments aligned with the 4x4 strategic plan: financial aid; information technology upgrades; student recruitment and retention; instructional capacity; facilities and infrastructure; student services and activities
HCOM will be proposing a 5% increase in tuition for medical students. This increase keeps the college in a competitive position for prospective students, while allowing for investments in medical research and programs.
The proposed tuition rates for Regional Campuses include the collapsing of a multi-rate structure into a single credit hour rate for all regional campuses, while increasing rates at a weighted average rate of 1.58%. Collapsing the rates will create increases up to 8% for certain student populations, while lowering rates close to 6% for others with a net effect of 0.42%. The Regional Campus leadership believes this adjustment will not affect enrollment and is in the long-term best interest of the campuses.
Rate increases for our Residential Housing and Dining Auxiliaries will allow each operation to address inflationary pressures while meeting their long-term capital improvement plans.
Proposed FY’13 Tuition & Fee Increases
Tuition:
Athens Campus Undergraduate: 3.5% Athens Campus Non-Resident Surcharge: No Increase Athens Campus Graduate: No Increase
Regional Campuses: 1.58% weighted average (see discussion regarding collapsing rates)
HCOM: 5%
11 Fees :
Room Rate: 3.5% Board Rate: 1.5%
Other Fees: Similar to prior years, there are recommended additions and modifications to Course Fees, College Technology Fees, & Program Fees Course Fees were evaluated by a committee to determine the appropriate conversion to a semester fee including any inflationary increases to existing fees and removal of fees no longer needed There will be a neutral conversion of existing College Technology Fees (e.g. a $100/quarter fee will become a $150/semester fee) Program fees for off-campus graduate programs were converted to semesters and inflationary increases were approved as well as the creation of new rates for cohorts that will be starting during the next year.
Working List of Athens Campus Investments
Expenditures Budget True‐ups Prior Year Adjustments$ 1,127,862 Utility Increases $ 1,500,000 Subtotal$ 2,627,862 Effective Compensation Practices Healthcare Increases ‐ 5.5% $ 1,628,064 Raise Pool ‐ (1.5% ‐ 3% range; modeled at 3%) $ 5,031,493 Subtotal$ 6,659,557 Effective Enrollment Planning Undergraduate and Graduate Financial Aid $ 1,120,300 Academic and Administrative Information Technology$ 1,146,720 Student Recruitment and Retention $ 618,203 Subtotal$ 2,885,223 Improved Financial Strength Facilities and Infrastructure $ 1,878,280
Inspired Teaching and Research Instructional Capacity $ 800,000
Exemplary Student Support Services Student Activities $ 700,862 Career Services $ 85,000 Student Advising $ 55,000 Subtotal$ 840,862
Total ‐ Expenditures$ 15,691,784
12 Budget Update Agenda
Proposed FY 2013 Fees Budget Process Goals Balancing Objectives Access & Affordability Strategic Planning & Investment SSI Projection Closing the Gap
13 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Rate Increases
Instruction & General Non‐Resident Tuition and Fees Fee Surcharge Athens Campus Undergraduate 3.5% 0% Athens Campus Graduate 0% 0% Heritage College of Medicine 5.0% 5.0% Regional Campus Undergraduate 1.57% *0% *
* Regional rates have been collapsed into one rate table for all campuses
FY 2012‐2013 Room & Board Increase Standard Double Room 3.5% Meal Plans (excl flex point plans) 1.5%
14 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Semester Conversion
For most fees, quarter rates were increased by 150% to translate from three quarters to two semesters, keeping the annual charges neutral. The medical program will transition from 14 quarters to 10 semesters so that tuition table was converted using this conversion rate. Off-campus graduate programs were converted using the ratio of hours required under quarters to hours required under semesters to ensure that the total charged for the program would remain neutral.
15 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Athens Campus Athens Instructional and General Fee The University seeks approval to increase the combined undergraduate instructional and general fees by 3.5% or $173 per semester for a full-time resident undergraduate This tuition increase will be used to support strategic investments and inflationary cost pressures Graduate tuition and Non Resident fees for undergraduate and graduate students remain unchanged
16 Proposed FY 2013 Fees HCOM HCOM Tuition, Non-Resident and General Fee The University seeks approval to increase the instructional fees, non-resident fee, and general fee by 5% Even with this increase the HCOM tuition will remain among the lowest in the state for medical schools The proposed increases will support projected inflationary expenditure increases and investments in medical research and programs
17 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Regional Campuses
Regional Campus Instructional and Non-resident Fees The University seeks approval to consolidate the lower and upper division tuition and non-resident surcharge to one rate for all campuses. On the consolidated rate, the university seeks approval to increase the instructional fee by 1.57%. While the consolidated fee will increase fees up to 8% for certain student populations while lowering rates close to 6% for others, Regional Campus leadership believe this adjustment will not affect affordability nor enrollment, and is in the long-term best interest of all campuses
18 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Housing and Dining Auxiliaries Room and Board Rates The University seeks approval of a 3.5% increase in standard double room rates and a 1.5% increase in board rates. FY’13 is the second year of a phased consolidation of rates based on room type. The simplified rate structure creates greater comparability with our peers. Rate increases for each auxiliary will address inflationary pressures while meeting their long-term capital improvement plans
19 Proposed FY 2013 Fees eLearning & Off-campus Graduate
The University seeks approval to increase the program fees for off- campus graduate programs by $3 per hour for programs that will transition general fee revenues to Athens Campus programming
The Engineering Management program requests an additional increase in its program fee of $20 to make it more consistent with other programs in that college as it moves its program to the online format.
Approval is also sought for new cohorts in the Masters of Financial Economics, Professional MBA and Professional Masters of Sports Administration programs . New program fee rates . Reclassifying course fees for residency expenses as a separate fee labeled Specialized Services / Materials (based on credit hours)
20 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Student & Other Fees
The Budget Planning Council sub-committee for Student Course fees reviewed all course fees to determine appropriate conversion from quarters to semesters. We are recommending increases to 8 broad based fees including a 5% increase to HCOM Medical Learning Resource Fee ($445 per semester)
21 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Pending
The following are still under review and may be presented at the June Board Meeting College of Education Technology Fee Other Off-campus Graduate Programs
22 FY 2013 Budget Budget Process Goals
Alignment with & Progress on Strategic Plan Avoiding Disruption of Programs from years of Budget Cuts Tuition Increase Tied to Strategic Investments Managing Institutional Risk Campus Engagement Balance Budget
23 FY 2013 Budget Balancing Objectives
Promoting Academic Excellence Student-Centered Learning Experience Commitment to Open-access Affordability
24 Access & Affordability Sticker Price
$23,720 $24,000 Ohio School Cost Comparison‐ Total
$20,199 Tuition/Fees + Room/Board $21,000 $19,689 $19,400 $19,172 $19,113 $18,848 $18,176 $18,000 $17,738 $16,581
$10,640 $15,351 $14,774 $15,000 $14,156
$12,000 $8,830 $7,694 $9,753 $9,378 $9,780 $9,922 $10,398 $9,586 $8,511 $7,900
$9,000 $8,012 $8,484
$6,000 $13,080 $10,419 $8,926 $9,936 $9,586 $9,735 $9,002 $9,346 $10,044 $3,000 $8,070 $7,450 $5,672 $6,762 $0 Miami UC OU CSU UA OSU UT KSU BGSU WSU YSU SSU Central Room/Board $10,640 $9,780 $9,753 $10,398 $9,586 $9,378 $9,922 $8,830 $7,694 $8,511 $7,900 $8,012 $8,484 Tuition/Fees $13,080 $10,419 $9,936 $9,002 $9,586 $9,735 $8,926 $9,346 $10,044 $8,070 $7,450 $6,762 $5,672 Tuition/Fees Room/Board
25 Access & Affordability Commitment to Open Access
100% % of undergraduate students demonstrating need 90% who were awarded a need‐based scholarship or grant 80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% OU UT BGSU KSU OSU UA Miami UC % 92%90%76%76%71%56%53%48%
26 Access & Affordability Student Debt
$32,000 Average Indebtedness for Students who Borrow $28,000
$24,000
$20,000
$16,000
$12,000
$8,000
$4,000
$0 BGSU KSU UT Miami UC OU OSU UA Indebtedness $31,515 $28,186 $27,378 $27,315 $26,462 $25,330 $22,830 $19,000
27 Strategic Planning & Investment Strategic Planning Platform
28 Strategic Planning & Investment Strategic Planning Platform
Budget True‐ups ImprovedFinancial Strength Prior Year Adjustments $ 1,127,862 Facilities and Infrastructure$ 1,878,280 Utility Increases $ 1,500,000 Subtotal$ 2,627,862 Inspired Teachingand Research Effective Compensation Practices Instructional Capacity $ 800,000 Healthcare Increases ‐ 5.5% $ 1,628,064 Raise Pool ‐ (1.5% ‐ 3% range; modeled at 3%)$ 5,031,493 Exemplary Student Support Services Subtotal$ 6,659,557 Student Activities $ 700,862 Effective Enrollment Planning Career Services $ 85,000 Undergraduate and Graduate Financial Aid$ 1,120,300 Student Advising $ 55,000 Academic and Administrative Info. Technology$ 1,146,720 Subtotal$ 840,862 Student Recruitment and Retention $ 618,203 Subtotal$ 2,885,223 Grand Total $ 15,691,784
29 FY 2013 Budget SSI Projection
SSI 4-year Statewide Growth: 1.0% SSI OHIO Growth: Athens Campus: 4.0% HCOM: 7.0% Regional Campuses: -0.7% Athens Campus Enrollment growth – eLearning Programs Weighting shift – Degrees vs. Course Completions
30 FY2013 Budget Closing the Gap
Additional Revenue Tuition Increase ‐ 3.5%$ 5,786,251 SSI$ 5,150,312 Subtotal$ 10,936,563 Tradeoff discussions to achieve a balanced budget Potential Investments Subtotal$ 15,691,784
Gap to Close:$ (4,755,221)
31
V ICE P RESIDENT FOR F INANCE AND A DMINISTRATION Cutler Hall 209 Athens, Ohio 45701-2979 Phone: 740-593-2556 Facsimile: 740-597-1765
M EMORANDUM
To: C. Robert Kidder, Chair, Board of Trustees Roderick J. McDavis, President
From: Stephen T. Golding Vice President for Finance and Administration
Date: April 6, 2012
Subject: Ohio House Bill 133 – University Mineral Rights
At the January 2012 Board of Trustees meeting Chair Kidder requested that the University prepare a report regarding the implementation of Ohio House Bill (HB) 133 and the protection of University mineral rights under that statute. The scope of the enclosed report includes the Board of Trustees’ fiduciary rights and responsibilities under the statute, the implications of horizontal high‐pressure hydraulic fracturing to extract oil and gas on University owned land, a preliminary economic analysis that will require continued data gathering over time and a recommendation on the potential for the lease of University mineral rights to a third party entity, as well as measures to implement in the event of such a lease.
This is a very complex issue prompting significant discussion within the University community, the greater Athens community, the southeast Ohio region, and throughout the state. Within the University community there are differing points of view on the optimal course of action. A newly formed Ad Hoc Mineral Rights Committee developed this report in a good faith effort to capture all aspects of the discussion and to set forth an approach that responds to the concerns and competing interests that have been expressed. The aim of the report’s recommendations is to protect the long‐term interests of the University and insure (under current statute) that the Board of Trustees has the final determination regarding of activities on and utilization of University‐owned property.
The Committee focused on three specific public policy objectives based on current Ohio statute, in addition to discussions and testimony received during the campus forums. The proposed public policy objectives are as follows: Protect the rights of the Ohio University Board of Trustees to be the final authority regarding activity on and utilization of University‐owned property, as recognized in Ohio HB 133 within the fiduciary responsibility of university boards of trustees; in the period prior to the Commission’s adoption of rules, the University controls the terms and conditions of its leases. After the rules are adopted, the University can propose to the Commission special terms and conditions to be included in a lease that address “specific conditions related to the parcel of land” to be leased, R.C. 1509.73 (B)(5) and (C)(4).
1
Uphold a principal tenet of fiduciary responsibility—good stewardship of physical, human and financial capital—As it relates to mineral rights, this responsibility includes environmental stewardship of our land and upholding university commitments to ecological sustainability and climate neutrality, consideration of the impact of hydraulic fracturing on our surrounding communities including the potential effects on air and water quality, and the recognition that the University holds an asset of potential significant monetary value that could benefit the University. Fulfill Ohio University’s public policy role within the state—Part of the University mission is to improve the quality of life for all Ohioans through the applications of its research where relevant. In fulfillment of that mission, Ohio University has demonstrated a significant commitment to alternative energy sources; our nationally recognized faculty researchers are working in the area of horizontal high‐pressure hydraulic fracturing and are developing monitoring, assessment and treatment technologies that could address many of the environmental concerns raised about this method of oil and gas extraction. Additional research is being conducted in environmentally friendly hydraulic fracturing technologies; the exploration of environmentally benign and cost effective chemicals for fracking fluids; and novel techniques for shale gas conversion and reformation into other petrochemicals. The committee believes that as a part of the University’s tripartite mission, the Board of Trustees should consider how to align our research capabilities in this area with any determination the Board makes with regard to leasing mineral rights of University owned land.
The Committee also included an examination of sustainable economic growth as part of the report. The history of multiple short‐lived, boom‐to‐bust commodity resource extraction strategies throughout the history of Appalachian Ohio has been harmful and the failure to promote sustainable economic growth has led to impoverishment in the region as evidenced by the lowest per capita income and highest poverty rates statewide. The committee strongly recommends that if the Board of Trustees determines it to be in the best interest of Ohio University to lease its lands and sell its mineral rights, that a portion of the income received be used in collaboration with our local communities to develop strategies to promote sustainable economic growth that benefits the residents of southeast Ohio in the long term. It is also recommended that the university invest a portion of the income toward renewable energy generation and research. The University is developing strategies for sustainable economic growth which will be made available to the Board of Trustees for consideration as they are formalized.
In summary the Mineral Rights Committee is recommending a campus‐by‐campus decision as to whether or not it is in the best interest of that campus to lease their mineral rights. With that said, the Committee further recommends that only the Eastern Campus be permitted to enter into a lease at this time given the level of leasing activity surrounding that campus and the need to establish a baseline level of protection for University property. For the other campuses the committee recommends a moratorium until additional information can be gathered to insure the long‐term protection of our campus environments and surrounding communities. It is the Committee’s goal that this be accomplished by the Board of Trustees adopting a model mineral rights lease for the University that will comply with the requirements of HB 133 and afford the University with the environmental and ecological protections envisioned in the University’s Sustainability Plan.
2
Report to the Board of Trustees: Potential Leasing of Oil and Gas Rights on Ohio University Owned Lands Viewed Through a Sustainability Lens
Table of Contents
Report Submission ...... 4 Formal Recommendations ...... 5 Supporting Documents and Appendices ...... 9 Report Contributors/Membership ...... 10
3
Report Submission The Ohio University Ad‐Hoc Mineral Rights Committee, with support from the Presidential Advisory Council for Sustainability Planning (PACSP); the Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee; the Office of the President; and various Ohio University faculty, staff, students, and alums wishes to formally submit this report on the Potential Leasing of Oil and Gas Rights on Ohio University Owned Lands to the Ohio University Board of Trustees. For a listing of members of the aforementioned organizations, please see Page 10.
The pages that follow serve as an informed report to the Board of Trustees and offers recommended action for the Board’s consideration. The Mineral Rights Committee’s recommendations are followed by a series of appendices that are intended to provide a deeper insight into House Bill 133, facts and figures associated with the shale oil boom, potential impacts of drilling in Southeast Ohio, perceived leasing opportunities on Ohio University lands, campus comment and leasing best practices.
As stewards to the environmental, financial and personal health and well‐being of our campus, the Ad Hoc Mineral Rights Committee submits this report under the lens of institutional sustainability and climate neutrality; a concept embraced by President McDavis and by many of his peers throughout the nation who are signatories to the American Colleges and Universities Presidents Climate Commitment.
Introduction As Ohio University is placed into a situation where informed decisions regarding the potential leasing of oil and gas rights must occur in the near‐term, it is essential that the Ohio University Board of Trustees are provided with a fair representation of the facts. This report is intended to offer an overview of the issues that must be considered and compiles the general reaction of members of our campus communities who stepped forth during the comment period.
If Ohio University does not choose to enter into a lease prior to the organization of the Oil and Gas Commission as established by House Bill 133, the Board of Trustees must be prepared to accept or protest leases for parcels nominated by the state. We underscore the important voice the Board of Trustees has in this process and, as such, we are honored to serve as resources for the Board should any questions remain unanswered by this report.
On the following four pages, we have worked to offer a high level overview of our recommendations to the Board moving forward. All remaining pages and links in this document serve as an opportunity to provide supplemental resources to you in an effort to reach an informed decision. While not exhaustive, we feel confident that we have provided you with the most objective compilation of information possible despite the fact that this technology is truly in its infancy.
April 2012
The Ohio University Board of Trustees has been given the task of making an informed decision on the leasing of mineral rights on university‐owned property for the purpose of horizontal hydraulic fracturing (fracking). The contents of this report are intended to offer some clarity as the board works to establish an institutional stance on the decision.
The Ad Hoc Mineral Rights Committee has established a list of potential scenarios which the Board of Trustees may encounter in the near future. We have outlined each of those scenarios here and offered our formal recommendation as a collective committee. Many of these scenarios are quite complex and, as such, the recommendations offered here do not necessarily reflect the personal and professional opinions of each individual represented on this committee.
4
Formal Recommendations The Board of Trustees, by way of this report, has been asked by the campus community to develop immediate next steps for action. The Mineral Rights Committee has established the following recommendations for the Board of Trustees:
Step One: Establish Baseline Inventory Recognizing that, regardless of Ohio University’s decision to lease its own land, local landowners have already signed leases and drilling practices entering our communities need to be held accountable to environmental well‐being and the safety of our students, faculty, staff and community members. As such, we recommend that the Board of Trustees commit to the up‐front costs and work associated with collecting baseline data within two months of submission of this report. (It is recommended that the Board ask the Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs to lead this project). We suggest that partnerships be developed with the City Engineer in each campus community so as to partner in cost‐ sharing efforts of these tests. Additional partnerships may include the Ohio Department of Natural Resource and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, if the Board so chooses.
Baseline data collection and analysis should include, but not be limited to: ‐ Drinking Water reserves ‐ Groundwater ‐ Any body of water within five miles of a potential drill site ‐ Soil ‐ Geological Survey ‐ Farmland inventory (and harvest data) ‐ Reports of asthma, cancers, neurological disorders and other health conditions connected to environmental factors. ‐ Air quality (compared to Federal hazard standard) ‐ Road and bridge safety ‐ Habitat assessment of rare, threatened and endangered species
Step Two: Ensure Long‐Term Health of Resources and the Environment If Ohio University enters into any lease, it is requested that the above baseline data of the corresponding campus be formally submitted to the lessee. Upon receipt of such reports, we recommend that Ohio University request a formal written statement that the lessee acknowledge receipt of the data and guarantee that all baseline levels will not be degraded throughout the duration of drilling and within 10 years of subsequent termination of operations on University lands.
Request soil, water, and air data from municipal and county governments of any lands adjacent to any University‐owned properties engaged in drilling practices. A similar baseline monitoring. This process is necessary to ensure the health and safety of our campuses and communities and adherence to our institutional values and guiding principles which include: Our commitment to the region is expressed through stewardship of shared resources.
Step Three: Establish Institutional Safeguards We recommend that the Board of Trustees work to identify its priorities as it relates to this conversation and put safeguards into place should any University land parcels be nominated for drilling. These safeguards include but are not limited to drafting a sample lease that includes a variety of stipulations that holds both the lessee and lessor accountable to long‐term sustainability of ecological and financial health. In making these decisions, it is essential that the Ohio University Land Inventory and Lease Development Stipulations/Best Practices documents (provided in the Supplemental Resources section of this report) be carefully considered so as to protect our campus, community and economy.
Step Four: Create Consistent and Fair Decision‐Making Procedures for All Ohio University Campuses 5
Each Ohio University campus will receive varying levels of interest from drilling companies and varying levels of support from its campus community. As such, each campus must be offered the same level of consideration prior to entering into a lease. We recommend that Ohio University not seek out leasing opportunities on any of its campuses. Though, if approached for leasing agreements, a decision making process must be in place to ensure all campuses receive fair consideration. The Mineral Rights Committee would like to suggest the following process: ‐ Upon being approached for a leasing agreement, a campus must form a Campus Mineral Rights Review Board. The chair should be selected by the President in consultation with the Executive Vice President and Provost and the Vice President for Finance and Administration. Membership should include the Campus Dean, the University Associate Vice President and Treasurer, Campus Director of Facilities, a minimum of two campus faculty representatives, and the University Director of Real Estate, representation from University Legal Affairs, and University Communications and Marketing. ‐ The Campus Mineral Rights Review Board shall be responsible for preparing a formal recommendation to the President within 90 days (if not sooner) of being approached by an interested party. ‐ The President is then responsible for reviewing the recommendation with his staff, responding to the Campus Mineral Rights Review Board, and making a final formal recommendation to the Board of Trustees within 90 days. ‐ The Board of Trustees maintains final approval/protest rights of any parcel of land nominated for leasing. Upon receiving the President’s formal recommendation, the Board makes a decision regarding leasing options and submit that decision to the state’s Oil and Gas Commission. In preparation for this process, it is important that we provide an overview of the current status of each campus’ land: ‐ Athens Campus: Has not yet been approached for leasing agreements. Though, we do anticipate that we may be approached or nominated in the near‐term. As such, the Mineral Rights Committee makes the following recommendations for moving forward: o Abstain from any mineral rights leasing of the Athens campus in the near‐term. o Create a sample lease that contains all the safeguards necessary in protecting the institution, its land and the surrounding community. Keep such a lease on file for future nominations. o Allow the Board of Trustees to revisit nominations after one year of initial protest to determine if substantial improvements to the drilling technology have occurred so as to allow a Mineral Rights Review Board to revisit leasing options. ‐ Chillicothe Campus: Has not yet been approached for leasing agreements. We do not currently anticipate near‐ term leasing nomination to occur. ‐ Eastern Campus: Has been approached for leasing agreements. Leasing activity has been moving forward aggressively in Belmont County. It has been determined that the land surrounding Ohio University‐owned lands have already been leased and, as such, drilling (with no surface activity) on our lands may be inevitable. It is the Mineral Rights Committee’s understanding that, due to the provisions of House Bill 133, we must create our own lease now and enter into an agreement prior to the enactment of HB 133. A written resolution will be recommended to the full Board of Trustees on April 20, 2012 which will authorize the administration to enter into a lease with a reputable company at the Eastern Campus. o Immediate next steps suggest that the Board of Trustees must now work with the Mineral Rights Review Board of the Eastern Campus to prepare a lease that includes as many safeguards as possible for the proper protection of our Eastern Campus and the surrounding community. . Please see Lease Development Stipulations/Best Practices document provided in the Supplemental Resources section of this report for suggestions on moving forward with lease preparation. ‐ Lancaster Campus: Has not yet been approached for leasing agreements. We do not currently anticipate near‐ term leasing nomination to occur. ‐ Southern Campus: Has not yet been approached for leasing agreements. We do not currently anticipate near‐ term leasing nomination to occur. ‐ Zanesville Campus: Has not yet been approached for leasing agreements. We do not currently anticipate near‐ term leasing nomination to occur. 6
Step Five: Securing Investments Each drilling operation will, most certainly, provide a unique set of challenges and opportunities. As such, it is imperative that the Board of Trustees prepare the proper financial investments to protect our land, resources and health. It is the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Mineral Rights Committee that, upon signing any lease, the Board of Trustees secures financial investments in the form of surety bonds. For each 100 acres leased, it is recommended that the institution secure a minimum of $5 million in bonds that can be accessed should the lessor forfeit any repairs, maintenance, recovery or mitigation following the closure or abandonment of drilling operations and/or a well.
Step Six: Determining Proper Use of Income Financial prosperity through the extraction of natural resources raises a series of ethical questions regarding the proper value of, receipt of, ownership of and responsibility to these minerals and its associated land. Under House Bill 133, any proceeds generated by mineral rights leasing on state lands must go toward Capital Improvements (including the acquisition of land, and payment of capital costs including equipment, renovations, and repairs of facilities). With this in mind, the Mineral Right Committee has weighed the many arguments associated with this question with great seriousness and makes the following recommendation for allocation of income: ‐ 20% of income applied directly to infrastructure development of the associated campus. ‐ 25% of income applied to sustainable economic development of the associated campus’ community. ‐ 25% of income applied to renewable energy generation that will yield the highest outputs. o Does not necessarily have to be placed on the grounds of the associated campus, if placement elsewhere would yield higher energy generation. o If an alternate campus location is, in fact, selected, then the associated campus must receive a tax credit through Responsibility Centered Management (credit amount to be a direct correlation to the amount generated by the newly adopted technology, minus maintenance and other costs that would be absorbed by the chosen campus). ‐ 30% of income applied to academic research development as it relates to sustainable energy generation. o This is to include capital costs associated with sustainable research. o This supports Benchmarks 23 and 35 of the Ohio University Sustainability Plan.
Step Seven: What happens if our land is nominated after July 1? After the adoption of the rules by the Commission, R.C. 1509.73 prescribes the process by which property owned by a state agency is nominated for leasing. The Commission is required to approve or disapproved a nomination. If the nomination is approved, the property is eligible for leasing under the supervision of the Commission. However, public universities are afforded a right to veto a nomination. University property is designated as “class 2 property”, R.C. 1509.70 (B), and , as provided in R.C. 1509.73(B)(6), the commission may not offer class 2 property for lease unless the university, upon receiving notice of the nomination, notifies that Commission that the property “may be offered for lease”. The university’s failure to provide that permission effectively vetoes the nomination. There is no language that the Commission may overrule that veto.
Step Eight: Establish Long‐Term Maintenance Policy Proper oversight of leased land must be considered in the development of a lease. This may require a formal institutional policy on long‐term maintenance of the drill site. At minimum, we recommend that the Board of Trustees create a new Ohio University position that is responsible for the health and safety of University lands through proper monitoring and regular reporting of drill sites during drilling and for at least 10 years following the termination of a lease. The University must ensure that security cameras are installed, working and are monitored, that the lessee is in compliance with all environmental, health and safety regulations and that regular testing of all items referenced in Step 1 is honored.
Ohio University requires lessor to provide proof that they have purchased a surety bond before allowing them on University property. The lessor must provide: 7
1. regular (monthly/weekly) inspections of the site 2. documentation of lapses in compliance 3. preferred solutions for compliance to these rules – including a realistic and timely attention to fixing deficiencies 4. punitive sanctions ranging from small fines to lease termination and bond forfeiture depending on the severity of the offense
It is recommended that any lease include an arbitration clause that does not preclude the University’s rights to sue under Ohio State law if they lessor still does not comply with the terms of the lease.
Closing House Bill 133 has, most certainly, accelerated a serious conversation about the value of state lands that Ohio University calls home. The many intricate layers of this legislation require that the Board of Trustees approach mineral rights leasing carefully and swiftly. We genuinely hope our insights have offered some strategic guidance to your decision making process. We appreciate your consideration of these recommendations.
The pages that follow provide an overview of the research, campus comments, investments and narratives considered during the development of these recommendations. While not exhaustive, the appendices offered here serve as a resource to evaluate next steps.
8
Supporting Documents and Appendices
Report Contributors/Membership …………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 10 Environment ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 11 Opportunities Concerns Questions Economy …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 12 Opportunities Concerns Questions Socioeconomic …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 13 Opportunities Concerns Questions Infrastructure …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 14 Opportunities Concerns Questions Health/Safety …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 15 Opportunities Concerns Questions Public Relations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ...... Page 16 Opportunities Concerns Questions Land Inventory ...... Page 18 Lease Development Stipulations/Best Practices ...... Pages 19‐21 Campus Community Feedback ...... Pages 22‐27 Method Results
APPENDICES A. Fracking Overview & Resources B. Memorandum to the Vice President of Finance & Administration C. Forum Presenter Notes: Greg Nadon D. Forum Presenter Notes: Joe Adams E. Forum Presenter Notes: Bernhard Debatin F. Environmental Studies Resolution G. President McDavis Response to ES Resolution H. EECC Resolution I. Faculty Senate Resolution
9
Report Contributors/Membership
Ad Hoc Mineral Rights Committee Stephen Golding, Vice President of Finance and Administration Rebecca Watts, Chief of Staff and Special Assistant to the President James Fonseca, Interim Executive Dean of Regional Campuses Harry Wyatt, Associate Vice President of Facilities Donna Goss, Director of Engagement and Real Estate Management Nicolette Dioguardi, Deputy General Counsel Eric Burchard, Director of Government Relations Ben Stuart, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering Stephen Scanlan, Associate Professor of Sociology Scott Miller, Director of Energy and Environmental Programs Annie Laurie Cadmus, Director of Sustainability
Presidential Advisory Council for Sustainability Planning Ben Stuart, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering Annie Laurie Cadmus, Director of Sustainability Geoff Buckley, Associate Professor of Geology Stephen Scanlan, Associate Professor of Sociology Wendy Parker, Assistant Professor of Philosophy Harry Wyatt, Associate Vice President for Facilities Ed Newman, Recycling and Refuse Manager Dustin Kilgour, Interim Associate Director of Operations Jill Carlson, Student Representative Eden Kinkaid, Student Representative Elaine Goetz, Graduate Student Representative Jessica Bilecki, Graduate Student Representative
Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee Paul Logue, Athens City Planner Ana Rosado Feger, Management Systems Staff Annie Laurie Cadmus, Director of Sustainability Clifford Hamilton, Hazardous Materials Coordinator Henry Woods, Recycling/Refuse Coordinator Jill Rosser, Associate Professor of English Joshua Felker, Student Representative Kyle Kingma, Student Representative Scott Miller, Director of Energy and Environmental Programs Terri Nelson, Manager of Southeast Ohio Regional Library Rachel Ackerman, Student Representative Stephen Scanlan, Associate Professor of Sociology Hogan Sherrow, Associate Professor of Sociology and Anthropology Harry Wyatt, Associate Vice President of Facilities
10
Environment
The environmental impacts of Horizontal Hydraulic Fracturing (fracking) have been a topic of great concern in Southeast Ohio over the course of the past year. PACSP and EECC have worked together to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic of the environment as it relates to oil and gas drilling:
Opportunities ‐ Institutional Research on environmental impacts: o It is desirable for the institution to position itself as a leader in environmental impacts and water flowback studies for the industry. It is essential that such environmental research is not influenced by existing industry players. ‐ Potential environmental internship opportunities for students: o In an effort to increase environmental education opportunities at Ohio University, it is encouraged that potential leasing opportunities include experiential learning for a large number of Ohio University students. ‐ Increased domestic* extraction of a power source preferable to coal.
Concerns ‐ Water safety/quality and associated health concerns ‐ Destruction of quality soil for use in farming, gardening, landscaping, etc. ‐ Long‐term ecosystem viability and biodiversity of local habitats ‐ Health of local farm lands, farm animals and resulting negative impact on local food economy ‐ Increased air pollution ‐ Disposal of drill cuttings ‐ Increased institutional carbon footprint (will equate to financial demands placed on institution for offsets) ‐ The Land and Resource Management Sub‐Council of the Climate Action Plan, a university‐ supported initiative, has proposed a benchmark that would require the Lessee to provide documentation of offset investments for actual CO2 emissions from aggregate behaviors associated with drilling (transportation, construction, extraction, water use, etc.)
Questions ‐ *Can we guarantee that the extracted gas will be used domestically? ‐ Some researchers suggest that natural gas may not actually have a smaller carbon footprint than coal, as originally thought ‐ Additional resource to consider:
Summary It is the conclusion of the Mineral Rights Committee that leasing of oil and gas rights on university‐owned lands is in strict opposition to the institution’s commitment to carbon neutrality and sustainability values. A large financial burden will be placed on the institution in its efforts to offset extraction emissions. Therefore, when viewed through an environmental sustainability lens and weighed appropriately, it is the conclusion of the preparers of this report that Ohio University should not enter into a mineral rights leasing option for any of its campuses.
11
Economy According to the Ohio Department of Development, southeast Ohio is the most impoverished region of the state. As such, a potential boom in economic growth is initially alluring to some individuals. To better understand this topic, PACSP and EECC have worked together to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic of the economy as they relate to oil and gas drilling:
Opportunities Potential employment opportunities in a region traditionally hit hard with higher‐than‐average unemployment rates • Potential education and training opportunities in a region with historically low rates of postsecondary attainment • Property tax assessments that will benefit schools which are often under‐funded • The potential direct, indirect and induced effects of investment in related supply chain industries to serve the needs of the oil and gas industry and its employees. Examples include: engineering, steel, construction, housing, fuel, transportation, fabrication shops, welders, maintenance and repair shops, automotive dealerships, heavy equipment manufacturers, and more. Concerns Questions as to how many of the jobs will be filled by residents of the region Reinvestment into the region—a commitment that extractive industries have not historically demonstrated How much of the work is long‐term versus short term? Tourism, particularly “eco‐tourism”, is a significant revenue‐generating element of the Appalachian economy and anything that keeps visitors from coming will harm not only those vendors but related spinoff vendors as well: gasoline, restaurants, and retail, among others. Questions How much economic benefit will be accrued and is the risk of drilling worth the uncertainty of the economic reward?
Summary When viewed through an economic sustainability lens and weighed appropriately, it is the conclusion of the preparers of this report that Ohio University should only enter into mineral rights leasing options if the institution is able to negotiate bonds at a minimum of $5 million to restoration and integrity.
12
Socioeconomic The potential socioeconomic impacts of fracking have been overlooked during the process of evaluating the worth of a drilling boom in our region. In an effort to shed some light on this subject, members of the Mineral Rights Committee have worked together to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic of the social and economic issues as they relate to oil and gas drilling:
Report to be included here.
Opportunities Postsecondary enrollment opportunities for those entering the area for work Economic enrichment for the University in the form of endowments, gifts and other forms of philanthropic giving Are there political benefits that might be accrued? That is, with money in the region might that mean more attention and political voice? Concerns Maintenance in the quality of life that citizens have come to associate with the culture and history of the region as it relates to the natural environment The impacts of new found wealth (should that be the case) in a region not used to such inputs—sort of a “lottery effect” Divorce rates? Crime and violence Housing costs? Will rents and prices go up with the greater demand for housing? Or will land and housing values plummet if the environment and landscape are no longer as pristine as we have liked? Questions Questions of environmental justice and the assumed risks taken on by a population that has traditionally been exploited? Would fairness, equity, and ethical principles be in place? When viewed through a socioeconomic lens and weighed appropriately, it is the conclusion of the preparers of this report that Ohio University should abstain from near‐term leasing on its Athens campus While regional representation and input was offered to the Mineral Rights Committee, the committee recognizes that it does not have a thorough grasp of the unique cultural needs of each campus’ surrounding communities. As such, it is recommended that regional campuses that are experiencing an immediate push for near‐term leasing be apprised of these potential socioeconomic repercussions and consider them carefully upon the first meeting of the associated campus’ Mineral Rights Review Board.
13
Infrastructure With oil and gas drilling on any parcel of land comes a variety of associated infrastructure impacts. Local resources and amenities become stressed and local businesses may experience a sudden influx of demand and patronage. Members of the Mineral Rights Committee have sought a great deal of community feedback on the topic of infrastructure demand in order to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic of infrastructure within oil and gas drilling.
Opportunities Is there potential the industry could be the one to build/pay for new roads, bridges, etc. in a region/state hard‐pressed for and in great need of such assistance? Increase in local jobs related to infrastructure development Spin off of infrastructure development in other industries, economic opportunities
Concerns Irreparable or extremely costly damage to roads, bridges, and other infrastructure o Potential road blockage in emergency situations puts our campus community at risk Handling waste from processes; new or larger landfills and deep injection wells will be needed Local schools may become stressed in attempts to accommodate an influx of workers’ children Local health facilities, emergency management teams, and first responders may not be able to accommodate increased demand of services A sudden boom in population and industry could negatively impact the power grid o Could lead to increased power costs in an impoverished area o Could lead to rolling blackouts
Summary A sudden influx of industry and population will place new infrastructure demands on a community that may not be prepared to accommodate such needs. Additionally, we are doubtful that all residents of southeast Ohio who have already entered into leasing agreements had the foresight to include infrastructure donations to their legal documents. As such, we feel it is in the best interest of the institution to immediately begin discussions with local government to ensure that proper financial investments have been established so as to ensure our students, faculty and staff will not be disturbed by drain caused by the oil and gas industry in our community.
14
Health and Safety Consideration must be given to the health impacts this could have on a county that already has difficulty accessing affordable and adequate healthcare. Scientific studies show that air pollution up to five times higher in regions with drilling versus regions absent of drilling; water used for consumption and hygiene containing dangerous levels of mercury, and methane; natural habitats are being destroyed and, thus, changing the natural interdependency of species of regions with drilling instances of crime are increasing in areas of significant booms of wealth. The Mineral Rights Committee has worked with Ohio University Environmental Health and Safety staff to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic: Opportunities Research opportunities with regard to public health impacts attributable to drilling/extractive processes New employment in medical staffing
Concerns Negative impact on tourism: o Potential harm to the local landscape, which is a significant draw for tourism. If water/air are polluted then resources that bring people to the region will be harmed, e.g. hunting, hiking, biking, and fishing. Negative impact on: o Ecological and eco‐system health—not just people but flora and fauna, air and water quality Questions Uncertainty of long term versus short term impacts on public health—the science is too new here How safe are the drill sites for workers? How close can pedestrians get to a drill sites?
Summary It is the conclusion of the preparers of this report that the uncertainties associated with the health and safety of our campus and community are significant. At this time, it is advised that Ohio University not enter into mineral rights leasing options.
15
Public Relations Ohio University prides itself as a leader in sustainability through its exceptional programs and beautiful geographic situation in the foothills of Appalachia. Therefore, public image should remain a topic of importance for the Board of Trustees when considering a potential oil and gas boom near any of Ohio University properties. This can be a complex issue. PACSP and EECC have worked together to identify potential opportunities, concerns and uncertainties on the topic of the public relations as they relate to oil and gas drilling:
Opportunities Possibility for increased student scholarships ‐ The argument would be more that it would help those in the region more so than attract perhaps others beyond it. An endowed scholarship(s) that benefit historically under‐represented or first‐generation college students from Appalachia or elsewhere would probably be received favorably—especially when viewed as a new opportunity Short‐term economic success of local businesses due to influx in population
Concerns Potential negative social ramifications (increased cases of rape, violence, crime due to sudden influx of populations; increased addictions to gambling, alcohol and drugs) Inappropriate demand on community infrastructure (roads, lands, hotels, water treatment, etc.) Are documents like the Climate Action Plan and Sustainability Plan contradictory to the image of fracking? Recruitment challenges from admissions and enrollment management—especially when that office went to great efforts to create its “sustainability” brochure and promotes such efforts a lot Contradictions of university touting its beautiful setting Impacts on fundraising and development funds? We might also ask about staff and faculty retention somewhere. How much are folks going to want to stay if the university enters into such agreements?
Questions Will this positively or negatively impact the university’s ability to recruit quality faculty, staff and students? Do city and or county governments stand to gain any tax incentives and, if so, how do they these resources to create a more sustainable economic future?
Summary Regardless of Ohio University’s decision to lease, we are in the public eye on this decision. Ohio University is currently one of few institutions throughout the country engaged in serious discussion about leasing agreements. Therefore, we are aware that we will become a case study for other institutions. It is imperative that, in an effort to maintain a positive public image and uphold our reputation as a sustainable institution, we approach all conversations openly and honestly with the public. When viewed through a public relations lens and weighed appropriately, it is the conclusion of the preparers of this report that Ohio University should not actively seek out mineral rights leasing options at this time.
If a lease is prepared for any of its campuses, though, it is essential that significant effort is made to allow for research opportunities on the drill site. This will allow Ohio University’s situation as a public case study to actually offer scientific, peer‐reviewed data about the process. Thus, upholding the institution’s research mission while exploring unchartered territory.
16
Summary:
Cost/Benefit Analysis: The practice of horizontal hydraulic fracturing is in its infancy. As such, no case studies for best practices and cost‐ benefit analysis exist. If the Board of Trustees opts to enter into a lease, it will do so as a pioneer and, thus, will serve as a case study for future institutions that may consider this activity. Entering into an oil and gas rights leasing option comes with an undefined set of risks, challenges and opportunities. We recommend that the Board of Trustees prepare for environmental, economic and personal safety violations and damage to occur on leased property by investing in a minimum of $5 million in bonds for restorative costs for each lease –– these funds are to remain isolated for repair costs for no fewer than 10 years following the termination of the lease.
17
Land Inventory Mapping for all Ohio University campuses has been accomplished. The maps identify the land parcels owned or otherwise controlled by Ohio University as State Land. The maps have been forwarded to Mr. Michael George, Attorney at Law with a Law Firm specializing in Oil and Gas Leasing from Akron whose firm was appointed to assist Ohio University with this initiative by the Ohio Attorney General. All land as it sits now is classified as number two pursuant to Ohio Law. It will be incumbent upon the University with the assistance of outside counsel both environmental and business counsel to further reclassify all the property owned by the University. This project is underway. The first property to be reviewed will be the campus at Belmont or Ohio University Eastern. The Belmont area is experiencing a great amount of activity and the University officials have been approached both by companies and contiguous landowners to join in the leasing of the University land that contains valuable shale oil and gas.
Lease Development Stipulations/Best Practices Under House Bill 133, Ohio University will have until June 30, 2012 to choose to enter into a standard lease for mineral rights on any of its land. During that time, the university has the right to create its own lease agreement. In the case that Ohio University enters into an Oil and Gas Rights Lease, it is recommended that the Board of Trustees take the following items into consideration when preparing such a document.
Should the lease of any Mineral Rights currently owned by Ohio University occur, it is recommended that the institution sign a no‐drill lease that allows for the modification of “no surface activity.” Many of the provisions provided below offer suggestion for inclusion in such a lease. This option, as above, should also include efforts to gain higher education representation on the Oil and Gas Leasing Board as created under House Bill 133.
Institutional leaders must be aware of the potential hazards of hydraulic fracturing on university owned lands. As such, it is recommended that any lease that Ohio University enters into protects the future success of the institution. It is recommended that the following requirements be included in the development of any leasing agreements for Oil and Gas Rights at all of Ohio University’s campuses. Please note that success of such inclusion depends on the institution’s success at petitioning for higher education representation on the Oil and Gas Leasing Board as created under House Bill 133.
Establish an Ohio University Mineral Rights Review Board to include but not be limited to representation from University Legal Affairs, Budget Office, Facilities Management, Facilities Planning, Office of Sustainability, Student Affairs, Plant Biology, Development, University Communications and Marketing, Admissions and each of the regional campuses. The Review Board shall be responsible for overseeing the proper execution of any lease agreements entered into by the institution or state.
Ohio University retains the sole discretion/approval of the location of wells, waste pits, drilling machinery and construction (and associated infrastructure to include, but not limited to, trailers, trucks, built structures, roadways, gates, signs, lighting and other items).
Lessee must provide Ohio University with monthly reports to include the exact contents of the hydraulic fracturing fluids used on University lands and the quantity and type of mineral extracted.
Minerals shall remain exclusive to oil and gas. Lessee has no authority to extract any additional materials without approval from the University and additional contracts, as appropriate. As Ohio University is committed to carbon neutrality, it is essential that carbon offsets are included in the fuel usage associated with mineral extraction on our lands. The University Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee is the expert source for specifics regarding requests for carbon offset standards. 18
The Lessee shall be responsible for restoring all pre‐existing roads and resurfacing any lands that were altered for the sake of excessive foot or vehicular traffic. “Excess” in this document relates to any activity that exceeds activity prior to the Lessee assuming Mineral Rights.
Timber Clause: Lessee agrees to notify Ohio University of any planned removal of trees. A carbon offset must be applied to any situation which requires removal of any natural landscaping.
Habitat Protection: It is necessary that all natural habitats existing on Ohio University land are protected. The Review Board must approve of any site selection and reserves the right to refuse said sites if wildlife activity stands to be disturbed.
Water Damage: In the event that Lessee activities disrupt water sources on leased property, Lessee must correct damages immediately. Lessee’s use of water sources, ponds, lakes, creeks, etc. is strictly prohibited.
No well may be drilled within 500 feet of water sources or buildings.
Ohio University land may not be used for disposal or injection wells.
Lands deemed as “Protected” land by the Review Board may not be included in this lease. The Review Board reserves the right to remove lands from this lease at any time should significant data be collected to name new land as “Protected.” Such additions will be removed from the lease and compensation for such changes will be arranged with the Lessee. Compensation is not to exceed the original costs offered in this lease agreement.
Pugh Clause: at the end of the primary term, the lease will expire as to any part of the land that is not being used by the petroleum company
All wells or stations must be properly fenced/gated for the safety of Ohio University students, faculty, staff and visitors. The Ohio University Review Board and Environmental Health and Safety reserves the right to request additional safety measures be enacted at any time during the duration of this lease.
Lessee must provide a waste removal plan to be approved by the Review Board prior to commencement of any drilling. Storage of any byproducts, fluids or waste may not be stored on Ohio University property and must be properly managed in accordance with state and federal laws.
Upon abandonment, all wells must be cased and plugged and land be restored to its original state.
Lessee must allow regular research and testing of the site and associated production by Ohio University affiliated researchers (approved by the Review Board). All information regarding fluids, practices and expenditures must be made available to Ohio University researchers. Research will not be influenced by Lessee’s position or financing.
Ohio University reserves the right to inspect operations at any time (“inspection” to include still photography, videos, surveying, sampling and other activities as deemed appropriate by Ohio University staff and affiliates). If Lessor finds Lessee in guilty violation of environmental harm, Lessee must cease operations until damages are repaired.
19
Upon commencement of lease agreement and for five years following abandonment of site, Lessee must finance local water testing to all water sources within 2 miles of each drill site. Any negative results must be repaired under the “water damage” provision provided above.
Noise levels above 85 DB are not permitted at any time. Noise levels above 85 DB are not allowed within 500 feet of an academic, administrative or residential building. Noise levels above 85 DB are not allowed during the hours of 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. Please refer to city ordinances of each drilling site for acceptable noise levels.
Exterior lighting is not permitted during the hours of 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. Lessee must engage with local alternative energy companies to use alternative energy sources for operations. At least 60 percent of Lessee’s employees on site must be hired locally.
The lease may not be extended without recommendation from the Mineral Rights Review Board. The Review Board needs a minimum of 60 days to make a recommendation on any requests to extend a lease. Any mention to “force majeure” or lease extension in any lease is to be considered null and void.
20
Campus Community Feedback
Method A combination of online surveys and public forums were used to gather community opinion regarding the possibility of hydraulic fracturing occurring on Ohio University properties. Methods for informing the community about forums and surveys included news articles in Ohio University Compass, The Athens News, the Office of Sustainability website, facebook, and twitter pages, campus‐specific announcements and personalized emails to multiple listservs and organizations.
PACSP created an online survey which students, faculty, staff and the public were invited to complete. The survey collected both quantitative data and qualitative data.
A public forum was held at each campus. Comments were documented and submitted to the Director of Sustainability for inclusion in this report. All forum participants were invited to complete the online survey.
The forum structure hosted by the Athens campus differed from branch campuses. The Athens forum consisted of a one hour information session followed by an informal discussion period with panelists. The first session consisted of six panelists speaking to the following considerations: House Bill 133, geology, general safety, general environment, water safety, and economic and legal challenges. All panelists spoke for approximately five minutes. Afterwards, written questions from the audience were addressed for 20 minutes. This portion of the evening was offered via live webcast to regional campuses and other members of the Ohio University community may have been unable to attend. You may view an archived video of this session online at: http://www.ohio.edu/media/?videoid=7F255432DE5BFF2EA7D5E15CBA8D2C6B
Following the formal presentations, participants were invited to engage with speakers and guests regarding any remaining questions/concerns on the topic. Each attendee was encouraged to complete the online survey, and it was stated that free internet access was available at Baker Center and public libraries. In addition, notes were taken on the informal conversations that occurred during the second portion of the evening All questions written by audience members during the first hour were also recorded.
For more information about the Forums, please view the following news articles: ‐ http://www.ohio.edu/compass/stories/11‐12/3/fracking‐forum.cfm ‐ http://thepost.ohiou.edu/content/panel‐examines‐benefits‐costs‐hydraulic‐fracturing‐athens ‐ http://www.athensnews.com/ohio/article‐36508‐forum‐at‐ou‐airs‐issue‐of‐leasing‐campus‐land‐for‐oil_natural‐ gas‐drilling.html ‐ http://www.athensohiotoday.com/news/article_251882b2‐7922‐11e1‐bca0‐001a4bcf887a.html ‐ http://www.chillicothegazette.com/article/20120313/NEWS01/203130305/Several‐forum‐opposed‐fracking‐ OU‐campuses?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFrontpage
Survey: The online comment form served as a mechanism in which individuals were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the specific topic of oil and gas leasing under House Bill 133. 421 people began the survey, with a total of 383 respondents taking the survey to its completion (91% completion rate). The pages that follow outline the results of this survey and will provide an overview of campus/community response to the topic.
21
Online Survey Results:
22
23
24
3. Using the scale provided, do you consider the following potential impacts of fracking to be positive or negative?
Extremely Extremely Response Negative Neutral Positive Negative Positive Count
51.3% 24.6% 15.1% 5.6% Personal Safety 3.3% (13) 390 (200) (96) (59) (22)
21.8% 19.7% 39.2% 11.0% National Security 8.2% (32) 390 (85) (77) (153) (43)
71.8% 13.3% 8.2% 2.8% Water 3.8% (15) 390 (280) (52) (32) (11)
45.6% 29.7% 15.1% 4.9% Roadways 4.6% (18) 390 (178) (116) (59) (19)
22.8% 21.8% 22.6% 17.7% 15.1% Economy 390 (89) (85) (88) (69) (59)
71.5% 11.5% 8.2% 4.9% Local Ecosystems 3.8% (15) 390 (279) (45) (32) (19)
35.4% 25.4% 28.5% 5.6% Institutional Enrollment Rates 5.1% (20) 390 (138) (99) (111) (22)
35.6% 30.5% 22.3% 6.7% Faculty/Staff Recruitment 4.9% (19) 390 (139) (119) (87) (26)
25
7. How do you rate the importance of the following when making a decision about fracking?
answered question 390
skipped question 31
Not at all Somewhat Extremely Response Neutral important Important Important Count
29.5% 26.3% 27.6% 16.6% Scholarships 380 (112) (100) (105) (63)
10.0% 86.9% Environment 1.5% (6) 1.5% (6) 390 (39) (339)
90.0% Water Safety 1.5% (6) 1.8% (7) 6.7% (26) (351) 390
40.5% 50.3% Roadways 5.2% (20) 4.1% (16) 388 (157) (195)
37.5% 53.2% Economy 3.9% (15) 5.4% (21) 387 (145) (206)
27.7% 57.9% Aesthetics 7.2% (28) 7.2% (28) 390 (108) (226)
33.8% 52.8% Noise 7.5% (29) 5.9% (23) 388 (131) (205)
18.8% 67.7% University Reputation 7.8% (30) 5.7% (22) 384 (72) (260)
Key Quotes:
APPENDICES
26
APPENDIX ‐A Ohio University Oil and Mineral Rights Update Prepared by: Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee Last Updated: March 29, 2012
The Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee (EECC) is committed to providing Ohio University students, faculty and staff with the appropriate education on environmental topics relevant to the region. The information that follows was compiled in an effort to offer the Ohio University community with transparent communication regarding its oil and mineral rights leasing. Overview: Due to the recent interest in the oil and gas leasing of lands in Southeast Ohio, a great deal of students, faculty and staff have reached out with questions regarding Ohio University’s stance on the Hydraulic Fracturing (fracking) of its lands. While private landowners have the right to lease their mineral rights on a personal basis, public lands are governed under different laws. Ohio University lands are considered “state lands” and, as such, are governed under House Bill 133 (link provided in the “Resources” section). This provides the state with the right to “nominate” parcels of land for mineral rights extraction and essentially removes the state agencies’ rights to directly accept or reject leasing requests from companies seeking to extract the minerals.
Currently, Ohio University is working to prepare for the mandates of House Bill 133. A great deal of action is being taken in an effort to protect the university and its constituents. Such actions include (though, don’t exclude): ‐ Title Determination: Ohio University is working to determine the exact number of acres owned or managed by the university. ‐ Classification of properties: Under House Bill 133, state agencies (such as institutions of higher education) must provide the Oil and Gas Leasing Commission with a listing of institution‐owned lands and their associated Classifications (see House Bill 133 link below for more information regarding land classifications). Once all title determination has been complete, Ohio University must begin to appropriately group and then “classify” each of its lands. ‐ Preparation of Lease Terms: By June of 2012, the Oil and Gas Leasing Commission (as established through House Bill 133) will have established (and will begin enforcing) rules for nominating parcels of land for mineral rights leasing. Under these rules, it is anticipated that state agencies must submit to leasing using a general state lease without provisions specific to the agency. o Ohio University administration is working to protect the local economy, environment, human health and animal health by creating lease provisions should we enter into a lease at any of our campuses. A great deal of time is being spent by a variety of professionals in the consideration of these provisions.
Resources: The Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee has compiled the following short list of resources in an effort to provide the campus community with an objective overview of oil and gas leasing as well as the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) process. Please note that not all of the resources provided below are peer reviewed and, as such, great effort has been made to offer a balance of resources to allow the reader to intelligently approach this topic and create a well‐ informed response. If you would like to submit an article for consideration, please email the EECC Chairperson, Stephen Scanlan at [email protected]. Please note: we cannot accommodate all requests.
Academic and University Documents
27
Adams, M.B. 2012. “Land application of hydrofracturing fluids damages a deciduous forest stand in West Virginia. “ Journal of Environmental Quality 40:1340‐1344. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/jrnl/2011/nrs_2011_adams_001.pdf. Ahearn A 2012. “Managing Wastewater from Fracking, with Robert B. Jackson.” (podcast and transcript) Environmental Health Perspectives 120: Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.trp020112. Bamberger, M. and R.E. Oswald. 2012. “Impacts of Gas Drilling on Human and Animal Health.” New Solutions. 22(1): 51‐ 77. Charman, K. 2010. “Trashing the Planet for Natural Gas: Shale Gas Development Threatens Freshwater Sources, Likely Escalates Climate Destabilization.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 21(4): 72‐82. Colborn, T., C. Kwiatkowski, K. Schultz, and M. Bachran. 2011. “Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective.” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 17(5): 1039‐1056. Finkel, M.L. and A. Law. 2011. “The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A Public Health Cautionary Tale.” American Journal of Public Health, 101 (5):784‐785. Fisher, D. 2001. “Resource Dependency and Rural Poverty: Rural Areas in the United States and Japan.” Rural Sociology 66 (2):181‐201. Herringshaw, V. 2004 “Natural Resources — Curse or Blessing?” New Economy 11(3):174‐177. Howarth, R.W., A. Ingraffea, and T. Engelder. 2011. “Natural Gas: Should Fracking Stop?” Nature 477:271‐275. Howarth, R.W., R. Santoro, and A. Ingraffea. 2011. “Methane and the Greenhouse‐gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations.” Climatic Change. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.sustainablefuture.cornell.edu/news/attachments/Howarth‐EtAl‐2011.pdf . Kinnaman, T.C. 2011. “The Economic Impact of Shale Gas Extraction: A Review of Existing Studies.” Ecological Economics 70: 1243‐1249. Kittle B. (February 7, 2012). “Cornell Professors Duel Over Fracking Research.” The Cornell Daily Sun. Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com/Fracturing‐ Ingredients/Pages/information.aspx?utm_source=OPM&utm_medium=CPC&utm_campaign=Paid_Search&gclid =COGgjIGZjK4CFRLGKgodxG_Z9g. Levitt, T. 2011. “U.K. Shale Gas Boom ‘May be dirtier than coal.’” Ecologist 40 (23): 6‐9. O’Rourke, D. and S. Connolly. 2003. “Just Oil? The Distribution of Environmental and Social Impacts of Oil Production and Consumption.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28:587‐617. Panel Discussion. 2011. “Nuts and Bolts of Marcellus Shale Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing.” Environmental Law Reporter: News and Analysis 41 (7): 10587‐10601. Penn State University, Earth and Environmental Systems Institute. 2009. EarthTalks – Marcellus Shale Series, “Marcellus Shale Play: Boon or Burden?” Retrieved from http://www.eesi.psu.edu/news_events/EarthTalks/2009Spring/EarthtalksSpring09.shtml . Reddy, V.R. 2012. “Hydrological externalities and livelihoods impacts: Informed communities for better resource management.” Journal of Hydrology, 412‐413: 279‐290. Scientific American. February 8, 2012. “Stanford Geophysicist: More Environmental Rules Needed for Shale Gas.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=stanford‐geophysicist‐ more‐environm‐2012‐02. Union of Concerned Scientists. August 31, 2010. “How Natural Gas Works.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/technology_and_impacts/energy_technologies/how‐natural‐gas‐ works.html Union of Concerned Scientists. October 10, 2010. “How it Works: Water for Natural Gas.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/technology_and_impacts/energy_technologies/water‐energy‐ electricity‐natural‐gas.html. Weinstein, A.L. and M.D. Partridge. 2011. The Economic Value of Shale Natural Gas in Ohio. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Swank Program in Rural‐Urban Policy Summary.
Government Reports
28
Ohio Department of Natural Resources, “Marcellus and Utica Shale Data.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/geosurvey/tabid/23014/Default.aspx. Ohio House of Representatives. House Bill 133: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_HB_133 Chief of Division of Geological Survey (and member of the Oil and Gas Leasing Commission as established in House Bill 133): http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/geosurvey/tabid/7120/Default.aspx. U.S. Department of Energy. November 18, 2011. “Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Shale Gas Subcommittee Final Report.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://energytomorrow.org/energy/hydraulic‐ fracturing?gclid=CJ_dtPuLnq4CFckEQAodtRf0fQ#/type/all. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 8, 2012. “Draft Report: Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming.” Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/EPA_ReportOnPavillion_Dec‐8‐2011.pdf. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2012. “Hydraulic Fracturing Background Information.” Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/wells_hydrowhat.cfm.
Industry Treatment American Petroleum Institute. “Energy Tomorrow.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://energytomorrow.org/energy/hydraulic‐fracturing?gclid=CJ_dtPuLnq4CFckEQAodtRf0fQ#/type/all. Chesapeake Energy, “Fracturing Ingredients.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com/Fracturing‐ Ingredients/Pages/information.aspx?utm_source=OPM&utm_medium=CPC&utm_campaign=Paid_Search&gclid =COGgjIGZjK4CFRLGKgodxG_Z9g. Chevron. “Natural Gas from Shale: Unlocking Energy From Shale Rock Formations.”Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.chevron.com/deliveringenergy/naturalgas/shalegas/?utm_campaign=Shale&utm_medium=cpc&ut m_source=Google&utm_term=Hydraulic_Fracturing. Conoco Phillips, “Drilling and Completion.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.powerincooperation.com/en/pages/drilling‐and‐completion.html?utm_campaign=Non‐ Branded&utm_medium=PaidSearch&utm_source=Google&utm_content=Drilling&utm_term=what%20is%20the %20marcellus%20shale . ExxonMobil, “Energy and Technology: Natural Gas.” Retrieved April 7, 2012 from http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/energy_outlook_sup_gas.aspx. Energy Tomorrow. “The Truth about Fracking.” Energy from Shale Project. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.energyfromshale.org/.
Media Attention Al Jazeera English. 2012. “America's fracking problem: A controversial form of natural gas extraction is on the rise in the US.” Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/americas‐fracking‐problem‐0022005. Dolesh, R.J. 2011. “Fracktured Parks.” Parks and Recreation 46 (6): 56‐61. Frazier, R. March 23, 2012. “Is Fracking Making People Sick?” Living on Earth: Public Radio International’s Environmental News Magazine. Transcript and streaming of show available at http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.html?programID=12‐P13‐00012. Gold, R. March 13, 2012. “Faulty Wells, Not Fracking, Blamed for Water Pollution.” The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved March 23, 2012 from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304537904577277814040731688.html. Goodell, J. March 1, 2012. “The Big Fracking Bubble: The Scam behind the Gas Boom.” Rolling Stone Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the‐big‐fracking‐bubble‐the‐scam‐behind‐the‐gas‐boom‐ 20120301. Hobson, M.K. December 1, 2011. “Environment and Pennsylvania: The Fracking Question.” Roll Call. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.rollcall.com/features/Outlook_Swing‐States/outlook/‐210710‐1.html. Howarth, R.W., A. Ingraffea, and T. Engelder. 2011. “Natural Gas: Should Fracking Stop?” Nature 477 (7364): 271‐275.
29
Hunt, S. March 25, 2012. “‘Fracking’ is thirsty work: But groundwater isn’t plentiful in eastern Ohio.” The Columbus Dispatch. Retrieved March 29, 2012 from http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/03/25/fracking‐ is‐thirsty‐work.html. Phillips, J. February 5, 2012. “OU reviews land holdings for possible oil/gas drilling.” The Athens News. Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.athensnews.com/ohio/article‐36005‐ou‐reviews‐land‐holdings‐for‐possible‐ oil_gas‐drilling.html . The Columbus Dispatch September 25‐27, 2011. “Deep Pockets: A Three Day Series.” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.dispatch.com/content/topic/news/2011/ohio‐drilling.html. The Economist. November 26, 2011. “Fracking Here, Fracking There.” Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.economist.com/node/21540256. Marse, L. December 20, 2011. “New Fracking Worries: Methane Leaks, Radioactive Water.” Discover Magazine. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://discovermagazine.com/2012/jan‐feb/21/?searchterm=fracking. McGraw, S. 2012. “Is Fracking Safe? The Top 10 Controversial Claims about Natural Gas Drilling.” Popular Mechanics. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal‐oil‐gas/top‐10‐myths‐ about‐natural‐gas‐drilling‐6386593#slide‐1. Mother Earth News. February/March 2012.”The Case for a Ban on Fracking.” Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.motherearthnews.com/nature‐community/fracking‐hydraulic‐fracturing‐zmgz12fmzrog.aspx. National Public Radio. January 25, 2012. Is the Booming Natural Gas Industry Overproducing? Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.npr.org/2012/01/25/145785839/is‐the‐booming‐natural‐gas‐industry‐overproducing. National Public Radio. September, 2011. “The Trouble with Health Problems Near Gas Fracking.” Retrieved February 7, 2012 from http://www.npr.org/2011/09/29/140872251/the‐trouble‐with‐health‐problems‐near‐gas‐fracking. The New York Times. 2011. “Drilling Down” Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/DRILLING_DOWN_SERIES.html. Williamson, K.D. February 12, 2012. “The Truth about Fracking.” The National Review. LXIV (3). General resources Lustgarten, A. (n.d.) ProPublica. Listing of Fracking Articles by author. Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.propublica.org/site/author/Abrahm_Lustgarten. Maps Department of Natural Resources, “Areas of Utica and Marcellus Potential in Ohio.” Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=c070Q7UtUyo%3d&tabid=23014. Earth Justice, “Fracking across the United States.” Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://earthjustice.org/features/campaigns/fracking‐across‐the‐united‐states. Marcellus Shale Coalition, map of Marcellus Shale, Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://marcelluscoalition.org/pa‐ map/. Department of Natural Resources, “Class II Brine Injection Wells in Ohio.” Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Portals/10/pdf/ClassIIWellsMap.pdf. Organizations and special interest groups surrounding this discussion: Student, staff, faculty and community action is also being taken in an effort to raise awareness of this conversation. EECC has done its best to compile a listing of known groups below. If you know of additional groups that are focused on this conversation (regardless of its stance), please submit the name of the group and the primary contact and/or website to EECC Chairperson Steve Scanlan at [email protected].
‐ Athens Fracking Interest Group ‐ Buckeye Forest Council (http://www.buckeyeforestcouncil.org/) ‐ Network for Oil and Gas Accountability and Protection (http://www.portagecitizens.org/neogap/) ‐ Ohio Environmental Council (http://www.theoec.org/) ‐ Ohio Oil and Gas Association (http://ooga.org/) ‐ Ohio University Students Against Fracking ‐ Sierra Club Ohio (http://ohiosierraclub.org/category/gasandoilfracking/) ‐ Slow Down Fracking in Athens County (http://slowdownfracking.wordpress.com) 30
‐ Stop Fracking Ohio (http://www.facebook.com/StopFrackingOhio)
31
APPENDIX B MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Golding FROM: Nicolette Dioguardi and Dave Northrop DATE: RE: Shale Gas Leasing Questions This memorandum is provided to respond to questions that you have posed regarding leasing of university property for the production of shale gas. 1. Will a lease entered into by the university prior to the adoption of rules by the Oil and Gas Leasing Commission remain in force after the adoption of the rules? Is the Commission empowered to adopt rules that would affect the terms and conditions of such a lease? A lease entered into by the university prior to the adoption of rules by the Commission will not be affected by the rules, and will remain in force in accordance with its terms. R.C. 1509.73(A)(1) provides that prior to adoption of rules by the Commission, a state agency may lease its property "in consultation with the oil and gas commission" without any indication that rules subsequently adopted by the Commission may affect such leases in any way. To the contrary, that subparagraph provides further that upon adoption of the rules, a state agency may lease its property only under the direction of the Commission. Thus, the statute appears to draw a sharp line between the period before and after the adoption of rules, and limits the Commission's authority to leases entered into after rules are adopted.
2. After the adoption of rules by the Commission, may the university veto a third‐party's "nomination" of university property for leasing? Can that veto be overruled by the Commission or the Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management? R.C. 1509.73 prescribes the process by which property owned by a state agency is "nominated" for leasing. The Commission is required to approve or disapprove a nomination. If the nomination is approved, the property is eligible for leasing under the supervision of the Commission. However, public universities are afforded a right to veto a nomination. University property is designated as "class 2 property", R.C. 1509.70(B), and, as provided in R.C. 1509.73(B)(6), the Commission may not offer class 2 property for lease unless the university, upon receiving notice of the nomination, notifies that Commission that the property "may be offered for lease". The university's failure to provide that permission effectively vetoes the nomination. There is no language providing that the Commission may overrule that veto. However, the Chief of the Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management is given authority by R.C. 1509.27 to issue "mandatory pooling orders". Such orders may be issued upon request by persons who have insufficient property under lease to form a "drilling unit" to add adjacent properties to the drilling unit. After notice to the adjacent property owner and opportunity for a hearing, the Chief may issue an "mandatory pooling order" to add that property to the drilling unit without the property owner's consent. The non‐consenting owner receives a royalty for gas produced by the well, and no surface operations may be located on the non‐consenting owner's property. There is no statutory language addressing whether this mandatory pooling authority applies to university property for which a nomination has been vetoed, and one can argue that the Chief's general pooling authority must yield to the explicit authority granted to universities to refuse to lease its property. However, we cannot reliably predict how the Chief or a reviewing court would rule on this question. We therefore conclude that, with the possible exception of a mandatory pooling order, the university may effectively prevent the production of gas on its property.
3. Can we require special terms and conditions in a lease after the Commission adopts rules? The statute suggests that the answer to this question is "yes", but it is not entirely clear. R.C. 1509.73(B)(5) provides that the Commission's notification to a state agency that the Commission has approved a nomination of the agency's property "shall request the state agency to submit to the commission special terms and conditions that will apply to the lease of a formation within the parcel of land because of specific conditions related to the parcel of land."
32
R.C. 1509.73(C)(4) provides that the Commission's advertisement of the property for lease shall include the language of the lease, including "special terms and conditions, if applicable, that apply to the lease because of specific conditions related to the parcel of land." Thus, these two passages suggest that the university may submit special terms and conditions to the Commission, and the Commission must include those conditions in the advertised lease. Two considerations, however, place some doubt on this conclusion. First, under the quoted language, the special conditions must be based upon "specific conditions related to the parcel of land". This suggests that the conditions must arise from the physical characteristics or uses of the property or adjacent properties, and may not, for example, impose upon the lessor the university's general environmental protection policies that are not tied to the specific characteristics of the property to be leased. Second, Commission may construe this statutory language as providing it with authority to reject or to modify conditions submitted by the university. If the Commission takes this view, any conditions submitted by the university would be suggestions only, and the university would not control whether or in what form the conditions would appear in the advertised lease. Given these considerations, it may be advisable for the university to link its veto authority with its authority to submit special terms and conditions by informing the Commission that the university will veto the nomination unless the terms and conditions are included in the lease without modification. Accordingly, we cannot conclude with certainty that special terms and conditions proposed by the university would appear in a lease, but the statutory language allows us to argue that the Commission must include the terms and conditions as submitted. In the period prior to the Commission’s adoption of rules, the University controls the terms and conditions of its leases. After the rules are adopted, the University can propose to the Commission special terms and conditions to be included in a lease that address specific conditions related to the parcel of land to be leased. It is therefore possible to treat each individual campus and the parcels of land under the control of that campus differently. We are not aware of any provision of state law that would allow any other governmental authority in the state to impose a development policy on the University with the possible exception of mandatory pooling orders. Please contact us if you have questions on the above or if we can assist further.
33
APPENDIX C – Maps/Resource Provided by Greg Nadon, Geologist and Forum Presenter
34
35
36
37
38
39
Notes by Greg Nadon: General Comments based on the Forum
1) Please remember that only very small fraction of wells that have been hydraulically fractured generate the problems widely reported. The vast majority of oil and gas companies employ ethical professionals who have no interest in destroying the ecology of the region in which they happen to be working. However, accidents will happen so considering risk is always important.
2) The primary concern should be to protect the drinking water supply for the cities and towns.
3) A suggestion was made that if the University has to enter a lease that it be a non‐drilling lease. Please consider the opposite approach. Ohio University is the best equipped institution in southeastern Ohio to monitor drilling and production. We should take a leadership role in this regard.
4) Dust pollution. The dust from the sand used in fracking will not be significant. The size of particles used injected into wells is sand and the dust is a very minor by‐product of handling the sand. A far larger silica problem will be dust raised from roads under high traffic loads.
5) The use of fresh water in the fracking. This appears to be a serious problem at first glance, however it is not. A typical fracking operation uses several million gallons of water (the numbers quoted vary from 3 to 8 million). Three million gallons represents 1 minute of average flow of the Hocking River. Care must be taken not to withdraw so much that the ecology suffers but the quantities of water are available. Withdrawal from subsurface sources is more problematic.
40
The Hydrocarbon Potential of the Utica/Pt. Pleasant Under Athens County: A Geologist’s Perspective
The following is based on publically available data from the web site of the Ohio Geological Survey and a pdf file of the most recent presentation of Ohio’s Chief Geologist, Larry Wickstrom. I have slightly modified some of the maps based on my experience but they do not differ in any substantive way with respect to Athens County from those presented the Survey. New data will continue to be published, however the trends already apparent will likely not change in any meaningful way. I have also shown the outlines of Muskingum and Belmont Counties to show the contrast in geology between the Athens campus and those of Zanesville and Eastern. A final note ‐ as always, opinions will vary.
The target for the current interest in exploration in eastern Ohio is the Pt. Pleasant Formation. This geologic unit, which lies directly below the Utica and on top of the Trenton Limestone, is composed of organic shale and limestone that were deposited in a relatively shallow sea approximately 420 million years ago.
Whether or not the Pt. Pleasant is drilled in any location depends on both geologic variables and the ability of an operator to deal with the ensuing economic risk. In order to justify the expense of drilling an operator has to have a reasonable expectation of recovering costs and making a profit. In order to minimize the economic risk geologists evaluate parameters such as:
1) Does the interval contain enough organic carbon to generate commercial quantities of hydrocarbons?
This can be determined by chemical analysis and is typically referred to as Total Organic Carbon (TOC). Values of TOC of at least 0.5% are required for a hydrocarbon source rock and values of >1% are more commonly preferred. Map 1 shows that the Pt. Pleasant under Athens County has enough organic carbon to be of economic interest.
2) Was there enough heat to form hydrocarbons from the organic carbon?
Hydrocarbons form when organic molecules are broken down through a combination of heat and time. High heat values over a short time frame will produce oil or gas as will low temperatures over a long time period. Temperature increases with depth and the Pt. Pleasant, which is currently at depths of between 4,000 and 6,000 feet below sea level (Map 2), was formerly more deeply buried. It is reasonable to expect that the organic carbon in the eastern part of Athens County is more mature than the western end.
The degree of organic maturity can be expressed in several ways. One measure is vitrinite reflectance (%Ro) or, in this case, equivalent reflectance. True vitrinite is not present in Ordovician aged sediments but there are other measures of organic maturity that can be equated to %Ro values. Values of 1.4 to 1.6 occur in rocks that are producing oil; higher values produce increasing amount of gas. Map 3 shows the maximum values measured from samples of the Pt. Pleasant collected in Ohio wells. Athens County lies within the region that can be expected to produce a spectrum of hydrocarbons from oil to natural gas and this is of economic interest.
3) Were hydrocarbons formed and is there potential for more?
41
This question can be answered using a technique termed pyrolysis in which a sample of rock is heated in an oven and the artificially stimulated amounts of hydrocarbons measured. The amounts of oil already formed are approximated by a value termed S1 and the amounts that could still be formed by a second value, S2. A good source rock has S1 values > 1.0 and rock with good hydrocarbon generative potential has S2 values > 5. Both S1 (Map 4) and S2 (Map 5) values indicate that Athens County is a region of higher economic risk for drilling.
Based on these data the Ohio Geological Survey geologists have identified a region that they term the ‘core productive zone’ that is bounded to the east by lower %Ro vales and to the north and south by the S1 and S2 values. Athens lies south of this zone.
Two other considerations must be addressed before exploring for hydrocarbons in the shale play.
4) Is there enough rock present to form an economic accumulation?
This question can be answered by mapping the thickness of the productive beds, which is termed net pay. Net pay is not the same as total thickness. For example a well my encounter 100 feet of a target rock but only 20 feet will produce hydrocarbons due to differences in organic content or rock properties that were a result of differing environments of deposition.
Detailed maps of pay thickness are not easily acquired. One reason is that different companies have different criteria for establishing pay zones. However, it is known that from a regional perspective the Utica/Pt. Pleasant sediments thin to the south as they begin to drape on to of a feature known as the Lexington platform. Anecdotal reports indicate that the Pt. Pleasant thins abruptly when traced south into Athens County. This probable reduction in net pay increases economic risk.
5) Is the target deep enough to frack?
In order to use hydraulic fracturing the target zone has to be deep enough that the pressure of the overlying rock is sufficient to prevent fractures from propagating upward and to help expel the hydrocarbons. The goal of fracking is to enlarge fractures already present are a result of burial and tectonic forces and form smaller fractures that are linked. After the pressure is released the formation pressure helps expel the hydrocarbons into the well bore.
Different oil and gas companies have different cut‐off limits for the minimum depth of a target based on the previous experience of the company and the preference of the geologists. The Pt. Pleasant in eastern Athens County is a viable target, however I cannot evaluate the minimum depth that would be reasonable.
Athens County is presently a location of higher economic risk for Pt. Pleasant development that the core productive zone identified by the Ohio Geological Survey (Map 6). This only means that development will be delayed. The risk/benefit economic calculation changes if oil prices rise. Once the core production area is largely explored operators will move south until the risks outweigh the probable return.
42
APPENDIX D – Notes from Joe Adams, Forum Presenter Fracking Meeting Notes Joe Adams 3/27/2012
Safety is freedom from unintentional harm or risk
How safe is safe: 100? 75? 50?
95th percentile (i.e., doors/emergency escape)
Risk - frequency combined with severity i.e. driving 58 vs 98 * Both illegal * Both reduced safety * Same risk?
Concerns 1: Infrastructure Roads – wear o Accident and frequency Water Supply o Quality and quantity Traffic (coal trucks) o Build their own Electricity o Quantity needed
2. Waste Disposal 1. Three methods a. On site remediation b. Off site remediation c. Reinjection
3. Workplace Safety 1. OSHA 2. Typical oil rigs – dangerous
4. Pipelines – gathering lines (unregulated)
5. Emergency Access 1. EMS 2. Fire
Regulatory Oversight MSDS for injected material Licensing/permitting Enforcement
Safety Bottom Line If adequate controls are in place If they are properly enforced Fracking, like any other large scope industrial operation, can be conducted safety. APPENDIX E – Notes from Bernhard Debatin, Forum Presenter
43
APPENDIX F Environmental Studies Advisory Board Resolution on Hydraulic Fracturing at Ohio University The undersigned members of the Environmental Studies Advisory Board approved the following resolution: As the fracking boom is reaching Southeast Ohio, it is important to remember that our region has experienced short-lived boom-to-bust resource extraction before. The coal boom of the late 19th and early 20th century left Southeast Ohio in a state of environmental degradation and deforestation. The economic benefits went one-sidedly to a few corporations and individuals, while the population remained impoverished and the environment degraded. Poverty, like the environmental impacts, extends to the present day with Athens County posting the highest poverty rate in the state at 32.8 percent.i A fracking boom without attention to and remediation of undesirable short- and long-term effects will likely have similarly serious consequences for our social and natural environment. Fracking has been presented by extractive industries to landowners, institutions, and the public at large as an inexpensive, environmentally-attractive way to extract gas and oil from deep-level shale.ii Furthermore, it has been presented as an important engine for local economic development. However, recent scientific studies indicate that all phases of fracking may result in significant negative effects to public and environmental health.iii In addition, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is currently conducting studies on existing fracking operations to identify health and environmental effects.iv Lastly, the studies that stress the economic benefits associated with fracking have not been, for the most part, peer-reviewed and have been shown to overestimate the expected impact on local economic development.v The undersigned members of the Environmental Studies Advisory Board cannot, in good conscience, be passive bystanders in such an environmentally obtrusive and potentially hazardous activity as fracking, especially since we now have the tools to understand and regulate this resource extraction method. Scientists, engineers, policy makers and the public need more time to make intelligent and informed decisions about the full range of social, economic and environmental costs and benefits of fracking. Despite the fact that fracking is an industrial method of extracting natural gas that involves the extended use of chemicals and hazardous materials during all phases of the process, fracking is exempted from relevant federal environmental regulations. State regulations are currently insufficient and still under development in Ohio. Meanwhile, policy research in New York State suggests that “underregulation can lead to unnecessary, tragic, and irreversible costs borne by those populations least equipped to bear them.”vi We therefore voice our concern that fracking on land owned by Ohio University could have negative effects on the health and safety of our students, employees and the community at large. The well-being of Ohio University depends directly on the beauty and physical integrity of our campuses and their natural environment. Fracking-related contamination and pollution would significantly affect the university's ability to attract and retain students and faculty. We urge the leadership of Ohio University to refrain from opening up its land to hydraulic fracturing until better knowledge about potential side effects—specifically water, air, and soil contamination—is available. Additionally, we request that the administration and the Board of Trustees include faculty, staff, students, and community members in all discussions related to hydraulic fracturing on University land. However, should Ohio University ultimately choose—or be legally mandated— to lease its land for hydraulic fracturing, we strongly recommend that all of the precautions listed in the appendix be included and guaranteed in every lease contract.
The opinions expressed in this resolution are not necessarily those of the Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs, Ohio University or The Ohio University Board of Trustees. This resolution was signed by the following members of the Environmental Studies Advisory Board: Dr. Elliot Abrams, Department of Sociology and Anthropology Dr. Ted Bernard, Environmental Studies Program Dr. Geoff Buckley, Department of Geography; Interim Director, Environmental Studies Program Dr. Ariaster Chimeli, Department of Economics Dr. Bernhard Debatin, E. W. Scripps School of Journalism Dr. Jared DeForest, Department of Environmental and Plant Biology Dr. Glen P. Jackson, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry; Chair Environmental Studies Advisory Board Dr. Natalie Kruse, Environmental Studies Program Dr. Dina L. López, Department of Geological Sciences
44
Dr. Nancy Manring, Department of Political Science; Director, Environmental Studies Certificate Program Dr. Bruce Martin, Recreation Studies Program Dr. Michele Morrone, Department of Social and Public Health Dr. Willem M. Roosenburg, Department of Biological Sciences Dr. Nancy Stevens, Department of Biomedical Sciences
Appendix: Minimum precautions to be included in any lease agreements between Ohio University and horizontal hydraulic high- pressure fracturing companies: Water withdrawal for fracking must be regulated to prevent draining of local streams, ponds, and lakes (currently, Ohio allows a single company to withdraw up to 100,000 gallons of water per day without permit). Tier 1-3 baseline water testing of all potentially affected ground water supplies must be conducted prior to initiation of fracking activities so that valid correlations can be made subsequent to the fracking process. The type and quantities of all chemicals used in the fracking process must be disclosed prior to use. Such transparency would guide health and environmental monitoring such that health issues associated with toxic chemical releases and spills could be addressed with the proper causal information (currently, Ohio law only requires after-the-fact disclosure and many chemical mixes remain undisclosed as "proprietary" formulas). Pressure testing of concrete well casings must be performed to ensure quality control, as this is the most common source of failure and water contamination; Vapor recovery systems must be implemented to prevent release of toxic gases into the air. Independent (third-party) air quality monitoring systems must be required at all fracking sites to identify the release of toxic fumes from wellheads, compressors, tanks, pipelines, and storage pits. Well gas must not be flared, but either captured or used to generate electricity via microturbines or other efficient devices. Noise and light pollution must be kept to a minimum; compressor stations and drilling pads must not be in visible or audible vicinity of Ohio University campuses. Drilling-mud-containing chemicals must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste, and not be stored in open ponds. Frack wastewater-containing-chemicals must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste.
45
APPENDIX G – Presidential Response
46
APPENDIX H – EECC Resolution
March 30, 2012 To: Dr. Roderick McDavis, President, Ohio University CC: Mr. Stephen Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration Ms. Lisa R. Kamody, Chair, Administrative Senate Ms. Tracy Kelly, President, Graduate Student Senate Dr. Joe McLaughlin, President, Faculty Senate Mr. Kyle Triplett, President, Undergraduate Student Senate Ms. Traci Winchell, Chair, Classified Senate From: Ohio University Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee, Stephen J. Scanlan, Chair Re: Letter to protest against horizontal hydraulic fracturing on OHIO land
In 2011 the President’s Advisory Council for Sustainability Planning (PACSP) unveiled the ambitious Ohio University Sustainability Plan that subsequently has been approved by President McDavis and the Board of Trustees. PACSP is currently drafting the Ohio University Climate Action Plan, which will keep OHIO in line with the goals of the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment, of which President McDavis is a signatory. Initiatives such as these reflect the strong commitment of Ohio University with regard to important environmental issues. Ohio University’s commitment to these plans demonstrates its leadership among institutes of higher education, which play critical roles in promoting sustainability and responsible stewardship of public and private lands.
The Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee (EECC), in cooperation with the Office of Sustainability, has been charged with monitoring and implementation of these documents. The EECC is a standing committee at Ohio University with administrator, community, faculty, staff, and student representation. The mission and purpose of the EECC centers upon four roles:
1. Enhancing and preserving the development of a prosperous, equitable, and ecologically healthy campus and community 2. Improving the environment at Ohio University through monitoring, promoting, and supporting sound ecological, conservation, and sustainability practices in areas including but not limited to academics and education, administration, buildings and grounds, dining, energy, fundraising, procurement, and transportation 3. Promoting broad conservation practices on campus and in the lifestyles of Ohio University administration, faculty, students, staff, and visitors 4. Supporting the vital role that higher education plays in creating awareness of the interdependency of economic, environmental, and social forces challenging sustainability and ensuring its attainment.
The EECC therefore seeks to contribute to environmental well‐being and the achievement of a more sustainable future through conservation on multiple fronts. It is with this authority and keeping with this mission that this committee hereby voices a letter of protest against the development of horizontal hydraulic fracturing (hereafter referred to as “fracking”) operations on OHIO land.
The vision statement of the Ohio University Sustainability Plan claims that OHIO will be an active leader in campus and community sustainability and demonstrate the university’s commitment to ecological citizenship, stewardship, and justice. Resource extraction processes in and of themselves present numerous challenges towards sustainability. When
47
brought to bear against the university’s pledge toward sustainability and climate neutrality it is essential that university leadership live up to and not contradict its commitments. We believe that because of the numerous economic, environmental, health and other uncertainties regarding fracking and its potential negative impacts that the university should not rush to any decisions favoring the feasibility of this method of resource extraction.
We recognize that the demands of Ohio House Bill 133 have put the university in a difficult place and that a decision must be made in a timely manner concerning the use of university land. Furthermore, we understand the potential cost of losing control over potential mineral leasing rights on university property. However, such burdensome and unfairly imposed deadlines coerce the university into making decisions without having the full slate of knowledge about a process that could potentially be of great negative consequence to the health of the region and its citizens. Evidence from independent investigators and agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency needs to be brought to bear before informed decisions can be made regarding the fracking process. State legislatures in Maryland, New Jersey, and New York have recognized this, and have placed a moratorium on fracking developments in those states. Other states continue to follow their lead. Thus, not only should fracking on OHIO land be opposed but, H.B. 133 itself calls for strong protest and a potential legal challenge from the university.
Ohio University, like many communities or individual landowners in the region certainly has a right and responsibility to consider the possibility of economic benefits from this process—something this committee has taken into consideration, especially given our current budgetary challenges. Furthermore, we understand the view that there could be great benefits accrued in the form of community development opportunities, endowed scholarships, faculty and staff positions, philanthropic interests, opportunities for research collaborations and funding, and new facilities and construction among others. This could especially be the case on regional campuses facing different types of challenges than in Athens. However, economic benefits that come with a price of irreparable environmental degradation, enormous social costs pertaining to health risks and the quality of life of our community, and ruinous damage to the mission and reputation of Ohio University have great potential for long‐term harm and should not be pursued.
Furthermore, if history has shown us anything it is that the boom and bust cycle of resource extractive industries does little to improve the well‐being of the regions in which they operate as profits leave and poor communities are left to clean up the mess (Billings and Blee 2000; Goodell 2012; Herringshaw 2004). This is especially the case in regions such as Appalachia where citizens are often unjustly forced to make the difficult decision of sacrificing environmental well‐being for the hope of economic prosperity (Eller 2008; Scanlan 2011). True prosperity for the region can only come with a proper path of sustainability on environmental, social, and economic fronts of which Ohio University can be a model of research and teaching, just practices, and good citizenship. Too many uncertainties exist with regard to long‐term impacts of extraction processes like fracking. The science is new, and what information exists on the process typically comes from or is funded by the industries involved. Therefore, the risk is too great to leave to the trust of the oil and gas industry whose only obligation is to act in its interest and that of its shareholders.
In perhaps a precursor to what may come to Ohio, Chesapeake Energy as one example was fined $1.1 million in 2011 and another $565,000 in 2012 by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for contaminated water supplies resulting from gas drilling (Polson 2012). Stemming from this, water‐related threats from fracking are one of the foremost concerns associated with the process, whether associated with tainted supply sources, mass consumption despite limited availability, or disposal of wastewater among other considerations (Ahearn 2012; Charman 2010; Reddy 2012). As our most precious natural resource it should go without saying that any activity or venture posing a threat to our region’s water supply cannot in good conscience be pursued.
Further reinforcing the complexities of this issue and associated risk, there are numerous other environmental impacts and uncertainties as well that have been examined in a variety of studies. These range from health (Bamberger and Oswald 2012; Colborn et al 2011; Finkel and Law 2011) and climate change (Howarth et al 2011) to broader ecological concerns touching a number of fronts (Adams 2012; Levitt 2011) and the need for better governmental regulations to ensure the safety of the process (Scientific American 2012). 48
Coupled with these analyses are an extensive range of other areas of concern that we as a committee believe merit important consideration from the university before making a decision regarding fracking on OHIO land. These thoughts have been assembled through conversation among committee members and our colleagues across campus. These concerns can be summarized as follows: There is enormous potential for public embarrassment and backlash towards this issue. Such actions directly contradict the sustainability plan and make any efforts toward the President’s Climate Action Plan now in process seem fraudulent and hypocritical. There is great potential for this to play out unfavorably not only in the local media but nationally and internationally as well. OHIO is known as a leader in sustainability efforts and that reputation could disappear with one action such as this. There is concern for detrimental impacts on student recruitment or faculty and staff retention who may question the university’s commitment to sustainability in practice. Visitors are greatly impressed with what is happening here on the sustainability front, and students increasingly use this as a criterion in the college decision‐making process. There are safety and infrastructural concerns regarding large trucks on roads not built for their use, noise from machinery, foul odors, and other side effects from natural gas extraction and transmission. Such aesthetically detrimental impacts are an important consideration particularly given the beauty and unique ecosystem that is Appalachia. The many features that attract outsiders to the region and generate much revenue for its citizens such as local foods and organic farming, outdoor recreation, among other things could be irreparably harmed by this industry. This could potentially have a negative economic effect perhaps not considered in the cost‐benefit analyses of this issue. Environmental and economic justice concerns pertaining to the disproportionate share of hazards and ecological damage being thrust on those with the least economic or political power is also of great concern. The Appalachian region has long been exploited and this seems to be yet one more case where poor and working class families have been offered a "buy out" that supposedly will compensate them for the destruction of their land and living with the risks of ecological destruction. The gas industry employs an army of lobbyists, legal experts, and PR specialists to make fracking sound wonderful and fair and that the boon will benefit all. It is wise to remain skeptical of corporate spin and “greenwashing” no matter how much good may be claimed. In closing, the Ohio University Mission claims that we are distinguished by our “beautiful Appalachian setting” and that “our Athens Campus offers students a residential learning experience in one of the nation’s most picturesque academic settings” (http://www.ohio.edu/focus/). If the University truly believes in the beauty of Appalachia then fracking on OHIO or any land in the region cannot be tolerated, for anything else would be at best hypocritical. As a public university OHIO has an obligation to protect the community in which it resides. We have a responsibility to take the higher road and promote dialogue on important issues and serve as a moral compass apart from the political and business communities that have their own agendas. We therefore ask the Office of the President and the Ohio University Board of Trustees to actively take a stand on this issue and not allow fracking on OHIO land and also challenge the burdens of H.B. 133. By being a leader on this front OHIO can live up to its broader mission and speak for sustainability and the common good of the university and greater communities.
Thank you very much for your consideration and your willingness to move forward with dialogue as a campus community on this issue. Should you wish to discuss any of the above or if our committee can be of any assistance in any way please do not hesitate to contact Stephen Scanlan via email at [email protected] or telephone at 593‐1350, ext. 1384.
The following members of the Ecology and Energy Conservation Committee have signed this letter of protest. Ms. Rachel Ackerman, Secondary Science Education and Environmental Studies Certificate, Undergraduate Student Senate Mr. Kyle Kingma, Environmental Studies, Graduate Student Senate 49
Mr. Paul Logue, Athens City Planner and Community Representative Ms. Terri Nelson, Manager, Southeastern Ohio Regional Library Depository and at‐large Administrative Representative Dr. Jill Rosser, Department of English, Faculty Representative Dr. Stephen J. Scanlan, Department of Sociology and Anthropology and Committee Chair Dr. Hogan Sherrow, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Faculty Representative Mr. Henry Woods, Campus Refuse and Recycling, Classified Senate
References Adams, M.B. 2012. “Land application of hydrofracturing fluids damages a deciduous forest stand in West Virginia. “ Journal of Environmental Quality 40:1340‐1344. Ahearn A 2012. “Managing Wastewater from Fracking, with Robert B. Jackson.” (podcast and transcript) Environmental Health Perspectives 120: Retrieved March 11, 2012 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.trp020112. Bamberger, M. and R.E. Oswald. 2012. “Impacts of Gas Drilling on Human and Animal Health.” New Solutions. 22(1): 51‐ 77. Billings, D.B., and K.M. Blee. 2000. The Road to Poverty: The Making of Wealth and Hardship in Appalachia. New York: Cambridge University Press. Charman, K. 2010. “Trashing the Planet for Natural Gas: Shale Gas Development Threatens Freshwater Sources, Likely Escalates Climate Destabilization.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 21(4): 72‐82. Colborn, T., C. Kwiatkowski, K. Schultz, and M. Bachran. 2011. “Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective.” Human & Ecological Risk Assessment 17(5): 1039‐1056. Eller, R.D. 2008. Uneven Ground: Appalachia Since 1945. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky. Finkel, M.L. and A. Law. 2011. “The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A Public Health Cautionary Tale.” American Journal of Public Health, 101 (5):784‐785. Goodell, J. March 1, 2012. “The Big Fracking Bubble: The Scam behind the Gas Boom.” Rolling Stone Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the‐big‐fracking‐bubble‐the‐scam‐behind‐the‐gas‐boom‐ 20120301. Herringshaw, V. 2004 “Natural Resources — Curse or Blessing?” New Economy 11(3):174‐177. Howarth, R.W., R. Santoro, and A. Ingraffea. 2011. “Methane and the Greenouse‐gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations.” Climatic Change. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.sustainablefuture.cornell.edu/news/attachments/Howarth‐EtAl‐2011.pdf . Levitt, T. 2011. “U.K. Shale Gas Boom ‘May be dirtier than coal.’” Ecologist 40 (23): 6‐9. Polson, J. February 9, 2012. “Chesapeake Energy Fined $565,000 for Pennsylvania Violations.” Bloomberg News Retrieved March 13, 2012 from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012‐02‐09/chesapeake‐energy‐fined‐565‐ 000‐for‐pennsylvania‐violations.html. Reddy, V.R. 2012. “Hydrological externalities and livelihoods impacts: Informed communities for better resource management.” Journal of Hydrology, 412‐413: 279‐290. Scanlan, Stephen J. 2011. “The Theoretical Roots and Sociology of Environmental Justice in Appalachia.” Chapter 1 in Mountains of Injustice: Social and Environmental Equity in Appalachia edited by Michele Morrone and Geoff Buckley. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press.
50
APPENDIX I Sense of the Senate Resolution on Hydraulic Fracturing on Land Owned by Ohio University Finance & Facilities Committee March 12, 2012 First Reading
Horizontal high-pressure hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas, also known as fracking, is an extractive industry that may soon come to Southeast Ohio and our university. Our region has experienced short-lived boom-to-bust resource extraction before. The coal boom of the late 19th and early 20th century left Southeast Ohio in a state of environmental degradation and deforestation. The economic benefits went one-sidedly to a few corporations and individuals, while the population remained impoverished. The consequences are still tangible 100 years later. A fracking boom without attention to and remediation of undesirable short- and long-term effects may result in have similarly devastating consequences for our social and natural environment.
Whereas fracking is an industrial method of extracting natural gas involving the extended use of chemicals and hazardous materials during all phases of the process, but relevant federal environmental regulations do not apply to fracking and state regulations are still under development and in their current form insufficient and inconsistent (see appendix (1) for a list of unregulated desiderata);
Whereas fracking has been presented by extractive industries to landowners, institutions, and the public at large as an inexpensive, environmentally attractive way to extract gas and oil from deep-level shale; and
Whereas studies show that projections about the economic benefits seem to overestimate the expected impact on local economic development and an increasing number of studies indicate that fracking, in all phases of the process, may result in significant negative effects on the health and well-being of humans and animals, and may cause serious damage to our environment, particularly to water, soil, and air (see appendix (2));
Whereas Ohio University and its regional campuses gain their attraction from and depend directly on the beauty and physical integrity of our natural environment and fracking-related contamination and pollution would significantly affect the university's ability to attract and retain students and faculty;
Whereas Ohio University President McDavis has publicly expressed his reservations against fracking on public land—the Wayne National Forest—until all risks are assessed and assurances of the safety of the local water supply and the local economy can be provided (see appendix (3));
Be it resolved that Ohio University refrain from opening up its land to hydraulic fracturing until better knowledge about potential side effects—specifically water, air, and soil contamination—is available; That Ohio University support every effort to maintain and promote safe, sustainable, and environmentally friendly activities on Campus and on university-owned land to preserve the health and safety of its students, employees and the community;
That if Ohio University should ultimately choose—or be legally mandated— to lease its land for hydraulic fracturing, all of the precautions listed in appendix (1) be included and guaranteed in every lease contract.
51
Appendix D Endnotes: i Ohio Department of Development. (2011). Ohio Poverty Report. April 2011 ii See, for example, Chesapeake Energy webpage at http://www.chk.com/Pages/default.aspx; ODNR webpage at http://www.ohiodnr.com/mineral/shale/tabid/23415/Default.aspx; and the Ohio Oil and Gas Association at http://ooga.org/. iii See, e.g.: Theo Colborn, Carol Kwiatkowski, Kim Schultz, and Mary Bachran, “Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective,” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 17(2011), 1039-1056; Madelon L. Finkel, “The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A Public Health Cautionary Tale,” American Journal of Public Health 101(2011), 784-785; Michelle Bamberger and Robert E. Oswald, “Impacts of Gas Drilling on Human and Animal Health,” New Solutions 22(2012) 51-77, accessed March 8, 2012, dx.doi.org/10.2190/NS.22.1.e; Robert W. Howarth, Renee Santoro, and Anthony Ingraffea, “Methane and the Greenhouse-Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations.” Climatic Change 106 (2011): 679-690, accessed March 8, 2012, doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0061-5; Robert W. Howarth, Anthony Ingraffea, and Terry Engelder. “Natural Gas: Should Fracking Stop?” Nature 477 (2011): 271–275, accessed March 8, 2012, doi:10.1038/477271a; and Chris Mooney. “The Truth about Fracking.” Scientific American 305 (2011): 80-85. iv See http://www.epa.gov/hydraulicfracture/ v Thomas c. Kinnaman, “The Economic Impact of Shale Gas Extraction: A Review of Existing Studies,” Ecological Economics, 70 (2011): 1243-1249; see also: Amanda L. Weinstein and Mark D. Partridge, The Economic Value of Shale Natural Gas in Ohio (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Swank Program in Rural-Urban Policy Summary, 2011), accessed March 8, 2012, http://go.osu.edu/shalejobs. vi Emily C. Powers, “Fracking and Federalism: Support for an Adaptive Approach that Avoids the Tragedy of The Regulatory Commons,” Journal of Law and Policy, 19(2011), 913-971.
52
AGENDA University Resources Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125 2:00 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
5. Capital Campaign Update 6. Series 2012 Debt Issuance Update 7. Housing Development Plan Update 8. Facilities and Property Update 9. Socially Responsible Practices Ad Hoc Committee Update 10. OUHCOM Update Resolution, OhioHealth Definitive Agreement Resolution, UMA/AMA Merger 11. Resolution, City of Dublin 12. Resolutions, FY 2013 Tuition and Fee Approvals 13. Resolution, Mineral Rights 14. Consent Agenda, Construction Projects 15. Consent Agenda, Quasi Endowment Approval
Ohio University The Promise Lives Campaign
Board of Trustees April 19- 20, 2012
Campaign Prospects
Prospect Report
Prospect Distribution by Stage Stage Count
Actual 17% 59% 24% Solicitation 136
Ideal 27% 60% 13% Cultivation 485 Stewardship 192 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Solicitation Cultivation Stewardship Total 813
Prospects by Rating 600
500 478
400
300
200 181
100 100 24 30 0 Capacity Building
Unit Leads by Capacity Rating Unit $1M - & Up $100K - $999K $25K - $99K $10K - $24K No Rating Total Arts and Sciences 49 590 346 80 6 1,071 Athletics 18 248 182 51 1 500 Business 76 815 472 109 4 1,476 Chillicothe Campus 9 78 89 13 5 194 Corporate & Foundation Relations 13 243 88 2 21 367 Cutler Scholars 2 15 18 1 0 36 Diversity, Access & Equity 0 4 10 0 0 14 Eastern Campus 0 44 61 22 0 127 Fine Arts 17 331 257 86 6 697 Health Sciences and Professions 15 272 247 64 5 603 Heritage College 14 279 111 65 4 473 Honors Tutorial 4 155 129 30 4 322 Lancaster Campus 6 95 77 7 0 185 Patton College 28 365 344 51 4 792 Planned Giving 2 28 35 10 0 75 Russ College 26 390 287 59 4 766 Scripps College 49 471 319 79 11 929 Southern Campus 5 96 80 29 17 227 Student Affairs 7 55 26 1 2 91 University College 11 204 175 45 0 435 University Library 15 239 179 50 0 483 University-Wide 44 327 259 46 10 686 Urban Scholars 0 30 14 8 0 52 Voinovich Center 4 51 27 8 7 97 Women in Philanthropy 0 4 2 2 0 8 Zanesville Campus 0 37 59 13 0 109 Total 414 5,466 3,893 931 111 10,815 Lead Report
Lead Distribution by Capacity Capacity Count $1m + 414 $999k - $100k 5,466 4% 51% 36% 9% 1% $99k - $25k 3,893 $24k - $10k 931 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Unknown 111 $1m + $999k - $100k $99k - $25k $24k - $10k Unknown Total 10,815
Leads by Capacity 6,000 5,466
5,000
3,893 4,000
3,000
2,000
931 1,000 414 111 0 Public Phase
Campaign Microsite & Video
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration and Treasurer
Re: Update on Series 2012 Debt Issuance
Included within your materials is a brief presentation providing details related to the University’s issuance of $76.47 million in debt in February 2012 in order to fund several capital projects including the following:
Steven L. and Barbara G. Schoonover Center for Communication Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine - Columbus Campus Network Infrastructure Improvement Project – Phase II
As discussed during our January meeting, the municipal debt market was experiencing near record lows at that time. In addition to capturing these market lows for debt in support of the aforementioned projects, the issuance afforded the University the opportunity to refinance portions of existing debt. Specifically various serial bonds within the Series 2003 and Series 2004 issuances were refinanced with present value debt service savings of $2.6 million.
During the presentation at our upcoming meeting, we will discuss the market environment and the structure of the Series 2012 bonds.
If you have questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 740-593-2556.
Series 2012 Bonds
Projects Issuance Timeline Results Comparisons to recent University issuances
Series 2012 Bonds Projects
Steven L. and Barbara G. Schoonover Center for Communication – Phase I ($19.0mm) Chilled Water Expansion Project ($6.0mm) OU-HCOM Columbus Campus ($16.0mm) Network Infrastructure Improvement Project – Phase II ($7.5mm) Series 2012 Planning Funds ($0.5mm) Series 2012 Safety Projects ($1.0mm)
Refinancing: Series 2003 and Series 2004 Series 2012 Bonds Issuance Timeline
November 2011 – OU BOT Resolution January 2012 – Rating agency reviews S&P – Affirmation of A+ rating Moody’s – Affirmation of Aa3 rating February 13, 2012 – Pricing February 29, 2012 – Bond Closing
Series 2012 Bonds Results
Par Amounts Issued: New - $46.6 million Refinanced - $29.86 million University General Receipts Debt - $184.5mm True Interest Cost: 3.28% Average Life: 13.018 years First coupon: June 2012 Final maturity: December 2042 Series 2012 Bonds Results Comparisons to other University Issuances:
Series – Par Issued – All-in Cost – Avg. Life - 2012 - $76.5mm – 3.32% - 13.018 years - 2009 - $26.5mm – 3.50% - 6.316 years - 2008 - $15.4mm – 4.69% - 10.231 years
Series 2012 Bonds
Questions?
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration, CFO and Treasurer
Re: HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE
A ten-year Housing Master Plan update was presented in February of 2011 and endorsed by the Board of Trustees. That plan physically focused on 1) replacement of the small “new south” residence halls with new construction on South Green, and 2) renovation of other residence halls many of which are on adjacent East Green. The plan was identified in three phases of successive demolition followed by new construction as identified in the attached diagram. The first two phases of the Housing Development Plan were part of the six year capital plan approved by the Board at its November 2011 meeting. The project cost of the first two phases was shown in that plan as $205 million. The project cost of all three phases in a ten year time frame was shown as $413 million. The following items represent progress to date.
Construction Reform: In April 2011, the Board of Trustees authorized use of $3.0 million from the Residential Housing Auxiliary Reserve to hire consultants and proceed with planning for the first elements of the plan. At that time the State of Ohio was considering construction reform legislation that would add new delivery methods for state projects that could offer savings of 15% to 20%. Although, construction reform legislation was passed in July and the legislation went into effect in September, specific rules and procedures had not yet been developed. The legislation placed the authority to develop rules and procedures with the State Architects Office. Although many rules and procedures were developed and released by the State Architects in January 2012, others were released in March, and yet others may not be released until June 2012.
The University has been in close contact with the State Architects Office and has been able to work with them to take advantage of construction reform without getting too far ahead of the rule development. Ohio University staffs have attended various training sessions and forums for discussion in order to become familiar with the proposed rules and processes. The University has determined that the best delivery method for the new construction in the first phase of the Housing Development plan is the Construction Manager at Risk Method. This is a delivery method that was not available to Ohio University until January of this year.
Site and Utility Evaluation and Preparation: While the rules guiding Construction Reform were being developed, there were several necessary efforts being undertaken. The University hired RMF Engineering Associates to develop a Utilities Master Plan for the overall Housing Development Plan. That plan was completed in January of this year. Soil analyses were conducted to determine the necessary steps to building on the first phase site, Page 2 of 3 particularly because it is located within the 100 year flood plan. Construction strategies have been developed that include surcharging, compacting, and building up the site in elevation. A construction scheduling consultant was engaged to determine the schedule impact of these necessary site preparation tasks on a proposed construction schedule.
Utility and Site Project Implementation: The firm of EMHT Engineering has been selected to develop specific utility and site preparation projects for both the Housing Development Plan and other University projects. The Chilled Water Expansion project will connect chilled water lines now in the vicinity of South Green and Clippinger Laboratories with chilled water lines in the vicinity of Baker University Center. The project will connect the regional chilled water plant at South Green with the chilled water plant at the Lausche heating plant site near West Green and create the last link - a piping loop that will create a much needed level of redundancy backup for each building connected to this chilled water loop. The project will add an additional chiller and provide overall capacity that will serve the Housing Development Plan as well as the Scripps College of Communication project and future rehabilitations of McCracken and Seigfred Halls. Other Housing Development Plan utility projects are in the process of being analyzed.
Strategies for Parking Impact: The proposed first phase construction site will displace the largest commuter student parking lot on campus and the construction project will need an adequate adjacent staging area. There is also need for sound strategies for contractor parking, some of which needs to be reasonably close to the site and much of which should be accommodated remotely. The overall impact to the University is great considering that there will be other University construction projects with staging and parking needs that will be under construction at the same time. The University’s Transportation and Parking Committee was presented with strategies that might be employed to meet the needs, and the committee developed a specific recommendation for a combination of both new permanent parking areas and new temporary parking areas. Reallocation of existing parking areas and garages for various constituency groups will also be employed. EMHT Engineering has been selected to design the needed temporary and permanent parking lots.
Decommissioning of Wolfe and Ullom Apartments: The Housing Development Plan called for the decommissioning and demolition of the Wolfe and Ullom Apartments adjacent to the planned first phase construction site. The demolition will provide an area first for construction staging, then for mid-term commuter student parking displacement. Because of the site’s vicinity to Clippinger Hall and Clippinger Annex, it is foreseen that long term the site will be key to academic facility expansion. The Wolfe and Ullom buildings are in poor shape and have been identified for demolition in the University’s 2006 Vision Ohio master plan. Residential Housing has worked with the existing occupants to develop alternative living arrangements and has set a date to vacate in June 2012. EMHT Engineering is in the process of specifying the demolition package for bid.
Architect of Record Selection Process: The University issued a Request for Qualifications for an architect of record with the Construction Manager at Risk delivery method identified. Twenty two responses were received, evaluated, and short listed to a group of seven to be interviewed. These interviews will begin the last week in April.
Ohio University Staffing: The management needs of the University’s six year capital plan exceed current internal capacity. That coupled with recent vacancies, has led to the recruiting of project management staff. In the past few Page 3 of 3 months, positions have been advertised, resumes have been reviewed, and selected candidates have been interviewed via e-mail and phone. The University is now in the process of on-site interviews with selected candidates. Those on-site interviews will be completed in April.
Living and Learning Analysis: A committee of University representatives has been formed to focus on the future and ongoing partnerships and collaboration of Residential Housing and academics. The committee includes representatives appointed by the Provost, Vice President for Student Affairs, and the Vice President for Finance and Administration. The committee reviewed Residential Housing’s current vision, mission, goals and learning outcomes, existing learning communities and statistics, the Housing Master Plan Update, and progress to date. Tasks to be completed include:
Conduct focus groups with student residents in Adams Hall (new suite style residence hall) and current residential learning communities to include Fine Arts and Communications. Plan a series of individual and group meetings with Assistant Deans on future Living-Learning communities, partnerships and programming needs. Evaluate existing assessment and benchmark best practices, new trends and current university needs as it relates to facility design. Utilize the Architect of Record interview process as a way to inform the committee on experiences and opinions of these professionals on the influence of the built environment on the living and learning experience. Develop a recommendation to administration on the fit of the current phased plan with living and learning goals for the future especially with regard to location and configuration of new construction. Provide a recommendation on features to be programmed in to design plans for new buildings and renovations. Target Occupancy, First Phase: The time to initiate and complete the activities listed above, coupled with the wait for the rules and procedures associated with the implementation of construction reform has shifted the target occupancy of the first residence hall construction by approximately six months from Fall of 2014 to a January 2015 time frame. There is concern about the operational difficulty of a mid-academic year occupancy that is leading to consideration of a Fall 2015 occupancy target.
The integration of the renovation of existing buildings with the new construction phasing is under study. Ongoing renovations of Bromley Hall are planned for the summer of 2012 and 2013. If found to be in keeping with the future Living and Learning goals by May 2012, rehabilitation of Bush Hall on East Green could be ready for occupancy by January 2014. Although not yet under design, other rehabilitation possibilities such as Jefferson Hall on East Green, Bryan Hall, or Scott Quad, could be undertaken with Fall 2014 or January 2015 occupancy targets depending on the level of reconfiguration proposed and how soon decisions are made. Again, mid-year occupancy targets can be considered, but do pose operational strain.
PHASE I
PHASE II
PHASE III
NEW DEMO
HOUSING MASTER PLAN: CONSTRUCTION PHASING Housing Development Plan
Update
Tab Housing Development Plan Update
Progress has been made in the following areas since board approval of the Housing Development Plan in November 2011 Construction Reform – 15-20% savings possible; awaiting state rules and procedures
Construction Manager at Risk delivery method chosen for Phase I new construction
Request for Qualifications issued for Architect of Record; interviews to begin in April
Housing Development Plan Update
Progress continued: Housing Utilities Master Plan completed EHMT Engineering selected and designing projects Strategies for parking impact developed Decommissioning of Wolfe and Ullom apartments planned Project Manager recruiting underway Living & Learning goals for the future under review; findings to be reported in May, 2012 Housing Development Plan Update
The wait for construction reform guidance from the state has resulted in a delay in the target occupancy date from Fall, 2014 Looking at Fall, 2015 due to anticipated difficulty with a mid-academic year date Based on the May Living & Learning report, other hall renovations may be integrated into the planning for Fall, 2014 to Fall, 2015
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration, CFO and Treasurer
Re: Facilities and Property Updates
Performance Contract Update: A $33 million Performance Contract Initiative is included in the comprehensive six year capital plan approved by the Board at its November 2011 meeting. Updates on the planning of the initiative have been provided to the Board of Trustees over the past two years. The concept is energy conservation projects accomplished through a contractor at risk relationship through a monitored and audited savings guarantee.
The preferred contracting company, Constellation, has been selected. In preparation for an investment grade audit, the company is refining the engineering and scope of each of the energy conservation measures they have proposed to Ohio University. A June 2012 execution of the contract is anticipated. The project will be brought back to the Board in June for approval of a specific budget. The proposed energy conservation measures are anticipated to be implemented over a two year period. It is anticipated that the proposed fund source will be a combination of University bonds and Ohio Air Quality Bonds.
Grounds Plan for High Priority Areas: The Facilities Department proposed a capital project plan and maintenance improvement plan for areas of campus highly visible to visitors and the community such as College Green, Emeriti Park, Baker Center grounds, Bicentennial Park, and other areas along Richland Avenue that represent the vehicular entry to the University. The University has identified $2 million of FY2012 local funding to implement the plan. The plan includes increased grounds staff dedicated to upkeep of these areas.
FY2012 Safety Projects: At the beginning of this fiscal year the University identified $1 million to implement critical projects that would have a significant impact on safety. Approximately half of the initial list of projects has been completed, and the remaining projects are being design and are planned to be completed this summer.
Recently, the University identified an additional $2 million of local funding to the same category of projects in order to get a “jump start” on the on-going plan to devote $1 million a year to this category of project. High priority projects for this additional funding are: replacement of the leaking roof on Kantner Hall at $800,000, elimination of trip hazards from deteriorating concrete exterior stairs, ramps, and sidewalks at $250,000, Page 2 of 4
removal of a deteriorating chimney on West State Street at $100,000, and sealing of cracks on the University sections of the Hockhocking Adena Bikeway at $50,000.
In addition, an urgent issue arose regarding Galbreath Chapel. Sections of the roof were leaking and caused plaster to fall. The risk was such that the building need to be taken off line until the situation could be fully analyzed. The repairs needed to the roof were identified to be extensive and would require a major project of several months duration. Although Galbreath is a rather small building, the roof design is complex with sloped and flat sections and a cupola with windows and a steeple. The building has other issues including very limited accessibility to the handicapped, asbestos floor tile, and heating, air conditioning, and electrical problems. The University identified $1 million in the Series 2012 Bond Issue for safety improvements that are planned to mitigate all of these issues with Galbreath Chapel.
State Appropriations Approved, House Bill 482 The legislature approved House Bill 482, and it was signed by the governor on April 2. With this capital bill, as a departure with past processes, the Governor appointed a team to evaluate each proposed project based on its individual merit. In keeping with Ohio University's Capital Improvement Plan that the Board of Trustees approved in November of 2011, the University proposed that all state appropriations be allocated to deferred maintenance needs. A list of over 50 deferred maintenance projects were proposed to the Governor's team. The team embraced the concept of Ohio University proposing to invest all its state appropriation into the upkeep of existing buildings and recommended the list with minor modification to the Governor. Included in House Bill 482 is $18,620,500 in projects for the Athens Campus and $3,840,000 in projects for the five regional campuses. Each of these projects will be further scoped and developed. Those with total project cost in excess of $500,000 will be brought back to the Board of Trustees for specific approval. A list of the particular projects follows.
House Bill 482, Ohio University Projects April 2, 2012.
C30087 West Green Roof Replacement $ 1,100,000 C30088 Alden Library Renovations $ 2,700,000 C30089 Haning Hall Elevator Addition $ 500,000 C30090 Park Place Utility Tunnel Structure Repair $ 200,000 C30091 Clippinger/Accelerator Building Roof Repairs $ 550,000 C30092 Cutler Hall High Voltage Upgrade $ 350,000 C30093 Convocation Center Roof/Ramp Repairs $ 1,300,000 C30094 Lindley Hall Steam Piping Replacement $ 1,500,000 C30095 Memorial Auditorium Repairs $ 1,500,000 C30096 Campus Fire Alarm Upgrades $ 150,000 C30097 Exterior Painting/Woodwork Repair $ 750,000 C30098 Ellis Elevator Improvement $ 200,000 C30099 Campus Accessibility Improvements $ 275,000 C30100 Ridges Building #26 Demolition $ 300,000 C30101 Glidden Rehearsal Hall HVAC Upgrade $ 350,000 C30102 Peden Stadium Concrete Restoration $ 750,000 C30103 Chubb/Sing Tao/Seigfred Roof Repair $ 300,000 Page 3 of 4
C30104 Pruitt Field Repairs $ 1,100,000 C30105 Campus Safety Lighting Improvements $ 500,000 C30106 RTVC Building Roof Replacement $ 400,000 C30107 Seigfred Elevator Upgrade $ 175,000 C30108 Cutler and Wilson Halls Waterproofing $ 520,000 C30109 Clippinger Elevator Upgrade $ 300,000 C30110 Kennedy Museum Elevator Upgrade $ 250,000 C30111 Campus Roadway Improvements $ 750,000 C30112 Bentley Hall Roof Replacement $ 425,000 C30113 Lasher Hall Roof Replacement $ 200,000 C30114 Stocker Air Handling Unit Replacements $ 500,000 C30115 Utility Meter Replacements $ 250,000 C30116 Bird Arena Cooling Equipment Upgrades $ 475,500 C30117 Shoemaker Center Repairs - Chillicothe $ 750,000 C30118 Shannon Hall Renovations - Eastern $ 600,000 C30119 Brasee Hall Renovations - Lancaster $ 440,000 C30120 Herrold Hall Renovations - Lancaster $ 450,000 C30121 HVAC and Lighting Upgrades - Southern $ 420,000 C30122 Classroom and Lab Renovations - Southern $ 150,000 C30123 Collins Center Repairs - Southern $ 200,000 C30124 Campus Center Roof Replacement - Zanesville $ 250,000 C30125 Herrold Hall Renovations - Zanesville $ 580,000
Total Ohio University $ 22,460,500
If I can be of further assistance or provide additional information regarding this matter, please let me know.
Zanesville Campus / Muskingum Recreation Center Update The Muskingum Recreation Center (MRC), a $10.5 million building project on the Zanesville Campus of Ohio University, is proceeding on schedule and preparing to move the Controlling Board. The MRC, a partnership of Ohio University Zanesville, Genesis Health care Systems, the Muskingum YMCA and the Muskingum County Community Foundation (MCCF) was established as a 501(c)(3) in 2011. Two Ohio University representatives are on the MRC Board. Fund-raising efforts thus far total $5.5 million of community support, $3.5 million held by the MCCF and $2.0 million in pledges due to be received by 2015. Assistance from the Finance Fund (based in Columbus and affiliated with the Ohio Department of Development), a federal program offering New Market Tax Credit (NMTC) assistance, has been pledged. The NMTC will allow forgiveness of approximately $2.0 million of the $10.5 million loan.
In addition to construction of a two-story, 50,000 square foot building housing a lap pool, family/leisure pool, track, fitness center and child care facility, the MRC will pay for approximately $1.0 million in improvements to the adjacent OUZ campus gymnasium, Littick Hall. PROS Consultants of Dallas, nationally recognized recreation center consultants, have developed a self- Page 4 of 4 sustaining business plan. Williams Architects of Chicago, a nationally known aquatics design firm, has designed the facility. Corna Kokosing of Columbus will be engaged as a construction manager at- risk. Surveys have been conducted and Ohio University facilities and legal affairs teams are working with DAS to finalize the 29-year ground lease and usage agreement of Littick Hall as well as an operating agreement. Financial arrangements through PNC Bank should be completed by May 1, 2012. The bidding process will begin in late summer, followed by groundbreaking in Fall and completion of the facility in 13 months (Fall 2014).
Facilities & Property Updates Performance Contract
June 2012 execution of contract is planned Grounds Plan for High Priority Areas $2 million local funding for high profile grounds plan FY2012 Safety Projects $3 million in local funding earmarked to date State Appropriations Approved, HB 482 Entire appropriation devoted to deferred maintenance projects $18,620,500 for Athens; $3,840,000 for five regional campuses
Facilities & Property Updates Zanesville Campus / Muskingum Recreation Center
Future Board action to include:
Approval of a 29-year ground lease and usage agreement
Approval of a $1.5 million loan guaranty
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: John J. Biancamano, General Counsel
Re: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Practices
This Committee was created by President McDavis to advise him on steps we should take to ensure that university business practices are conducted in an ethical and socially responsible manner. This is not a standing committee of the university. We will be called upon by the President to look into issues or concerns as the need arises. The Committee’s charge is attached.
The Committee is comprised of representatives from the faculty, staff and student senates, Procurement Services, Institutional Equity, Student Affairs, the Office of the Provost, the Ohio University Foundation and the Center for Law, Justice and Culture. I am serving as chair.
The first issue on our agenda is “conflict minerals” – minerals used in the manufacture of consumer electronics that are mined in Central Africa. Brutal militia groups have taken over the mining and sale of these minerals to finance their military activities. Students have asked the university to take a position on this issue and to use our influence with our vendors to trace the suppliers of the minerals in their products and to state a preference for purchasing products that do not contain materials from tainted sources.
The Committee had its initial meeting on March 29. We will meet again near the end of April and hope to have a recommendation for President McDavis by the end of Spring Quarter.
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Jack Brose, DO Dean, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine
Re: OU-HCOM UPDATE
There are a number of initiatives underway involving the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine. Two specific items are discussed below.
OU-HCOM / OhioHealth Affiliation Agreement
As part of the $105,000,000 Osteopathic Heritage Foundation grant the Heritage College wishes to enter into an affiliation with the OhioHealth Hospital System in Columbus, Ohio. The purpose of this affiliation is to develop primary care focused programs that encourage students at our developing Central Ohio campus in Dublin. Students will be incentivized to enter into primary care and practice in Central Ohio, which contains many of the State’s healthcare and primary care shortage areas. The affiliation with OhioHealth will support the Central Ohio campus by providing educational support, clinical training, collaborative research opportunities, and the establishment of new graduate medical education programs.
University Medical Associates/Athens Medical Associates merger and restructuring
In order to provide premiere medical care in Southeastern Ohio and support the educational mission of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, University Medical Associates (UMA), Athens Medical Associates (AMA), O’Bleness Memorial Hospital, Ohio University (and its Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine), and OhioHealth have been evaluating the feasibility of combining UMA and AMA clinical practices under the umbrella of the Sheltering Arms Foundation. In this new structure, Ohio University would have an expanded role on the Sheltering Arms Board and the practice management structure of the new clinical organization. Physicians practicing in the merged entity would be faculty members of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine. There would be no increased cost to the Heritage College.
Combining forces with O’Bleness Hospital would allow recruitment of the best medical talent, better support the educational mission of the college, increase the range of services in O’Bleness Hospital and the Athens community, provide physician compensation based on national standards, and eliminate duplication of services and competition between the Heritage College and the hospital.
I look forward to further discussion at the April board meeting.
1 HERITAGE COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE AFFILIATION WITH OHIOHEALTH
RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Sections 3337.10, 3337.13, 3345.11 and other relevant provisions, the Ohio University Board of Trustees is authorized to do all things necessary for the continuous and successful operation of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine; and
WHEREAS, the University has received a $105,000,000 grant from the Osteopathic Heritage Foundation that will be used in part to fund the development of a Central Ohio regional extension campus for the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, (“OU-HCOM”); and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2011, in Resolution No. 2011-3246, this Board authorized the President or his designee to proceed with the negotiation and acquisition of property located at 7001-7003 Post Road in Dublin, Ohio for a purchase price not to exceed $11,000,000 as the preferred site for the OU-HCOM Central Ohio regional campus; and
WHEREAS, university leaders and staff have entered into discussions with OhioHealth, a health care system comprised of member hospitals and ambulatory facilities located throughout Central Ohio, with respect to an academic affiliation agreement; and
WHEREAS, university leaders and staff have recommended the approval of an Affiliation Agreement with OhioHealth under which OhioHealth will be recognized as OU-HCOM’s Preeminent Education Partner among all hospital systems affiliated with OU-HCOM’s Central Ohio Extension Campus; and
WHEREAS, the recommended Affiliation Agreement further provides for collaboration and the sharing of services and facilities between OU-HCOM and OhioHealth for the purpose of educating osteopathic physicians and increasing the number of such physicians who will specialize in primary care and who are prepared to practice in Central Ohio following completion of their training;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to proceed with the further negotiation and execution of an Affiliation Agreement with OhioHealth subject to legal review and upon his determination that this Agreement is in the best interests of the University and that it will advance the teaching, research and service mission of the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine.
2 Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine/OhioHealth Affiliation
3
4
5 Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine/OhioHealth Affiliation 1. Provide expertise in developing and implementing a curriculum designed to develop primary care physicians 2. Provide clinical training for students at the Central Ohio campus and Athens campuses 3. Work collaboratively to develop didactic instruction for both Central Ohio and Athens students 4. Graduate primary care physicians who will practice in health shortage areas in Central Ohio 5. Promote the development of new residency and fellowship programs in Central Ohio
6 Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine/OhioHealth Affiliation 6. Work collaboratively to develop medical services to patients who cannot afford medical services in Central Ohio 7. Partner to raise funds to support the Central Ohio program
7 Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine/OhioHealth Affiliation NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to proceed with the further negotiation and execution of an Affiliation Agreement with OhioHealth subject to legal review and upon his determination that this Agreement is in the best interests of the University and that it will advance the teaching, research and service mission of the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine.
8 MERGER OF UNIVERSITY MEDICAL ASSOCIATES INTO ATHENS MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, LLC
RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 1978-395, this Board authorized the creation of Ohio University Medical Center, Inc., a for-profit corporation, for the purpose of employing faculty members in the Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine and managing their private clinical practice; and
WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 2001-1782, this Board approved the restructuring of Ohio University Medical Center, Inc. into an non-profit corporation; and
WHEREAS, effective July 1, 2003, the name of Ohio University Medical Center, Inc. was changed to University Medical Associates, (“UMA”); and
WHEREAS, Athens Medical Associates, LLC, (“AMA”), is a non-profit, tax exempt limited liability company that employs physicians and operates a medical practice; and
WHEREAS, the sole member of AMA is Sheltering Arms Hospital Foundation, Inc., doing business as O’Bleness Memorial Hospital; and
WHEREAS, the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, (“OU- HCOM”) has recommended that UMA be merged into AMA to create a non-profit, tax exempt limited liability company, (“New Corporation”) the sole member of which will be Sheltering Arms Hospital Foundation, Inc., doing business as O’Bleness Memorial Hospital; and
WHEREAS, the New Corporation will employ OU-HCOM faculty members for the purpose of managing their clinical practice and will serve as the practice plan for OU- HCOM;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to approve the proposed merger of UMA into AMA and the subsequent creation of a New Corporation that will serve as the practice plan for OU-HCOM, and to sign any documents attendant thereto, subject to legal review and analysis of the long term financial implications of this arrangement and upon his determination that the merger is in the best interests of the University and that it will advance the teaching, research and service mission of the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine.
9 UMA – AMA MERGER Jack Brose, D.O. Dean, Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine
10 Plan
• Merger of UMA and AMA into a single combined multispecialty physician group practice under the common control of the Sheltering Arms Foundation Board of Directors • Combined physician group would serve as the faculty practice plan for the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine
11 Proposed Governance
• Ohio University would be provided three designated seats on this Board, with one being the Dean of OU-HCOM and the other two being appointed by the President of Ohio University • The physician group would have a five member Board of Managers that would report to the Sheltering Arms Foundation Board • This Board of Managers would include the CEO of OMH, the Dean of OU-HCOM, two Sheltering Arms Board members of which one would be from Ohio University, and a physician representative from the group
12 Other Highlights
• OU-HCOM would remain committed to financial and logistics support for this group in a manner and amount similar to that which occurs with UMA • Existing UMA employees, and all assets and liabilities, would become the responsibility of the combined physician group
13 Overall Financials
• Hospital-owned physician practices commonly run at a financial loss which is recovered through downstream revenue • All positive or negative financial variances will be the responsibility of the O’Bleness Health System
14 OU-HCOM Position
• This merger is viewed favorably by OU-HCOM and is seen a necessary step that will: • Ensure the continued growth and success of the faculty practice plan • Significantly increase the hospitals involvement with medical education and training opportunities • Enhance medical care in the community • Positively impact the ability of OU-HCOM and OMH to recruit high quality physicians to the community • Minimize duplication of medical services
15 Recommendation
• Approval of the Board resolution to allow the President of Ohio University, or his designee, to approve the proposed merger of UMA into AMA upon his determination that the merger is in the best interests of the University and that it will advance the teaching, research and service mission of the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine.
16 DUBLIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Sections 3337.10, 3337.13, 3345.11 and other relevant provisions the Ohio University Board of Trustees is authorized to do all things necessary for the continuous and successful operation of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine; and
WHEREAS, the University has received a $105,000,000 grant from the Osteopathic Heritage Foundation that will be used in part to fund the development of a Central Ohio regional extension campus for the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, (“OU- HCOM”); and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2011, in Resolution No. 2011-3246, this Board authorized the President or his designee to proceed with the negotiation and acquisition of property located at 7001-7003 Post Road in Dublin, Ohio for a purchase price not to exceed $11,000,000 as the preferred site for the OU-HCOM Central Ohio regional campus; and
WHEREAS, university leaders and staff, assisted by real estate consultants and legal counsel duly appointed by the Ohio Attorney General have entered into discussions with the City of Dublin with respect to the creation of an Economic Development Agreement that contemplates the conveyance to the University of parcels of real estate contiguous to the property located at 7001- 7003 Post Road in Dublin, Ohio for the purpose of constructing additional University facilities and engaging in other appropriate commercial development projects; and
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Agreement is currently under final review by the City of Dublin and the University with an anticipated execution date in May, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the university leaders and staff have recommended the approval of the Economic Development Agreement with the City of Dublin;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to proceed with the further negotiation and execution of an Economic Development Agreement with the City of Dublin subject to legal review and upon his determination that this Agreement advances the teaching, research and service mission of Ohio University.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to negotiate and execute any documents necessary to effect the purposes of the Economic Development Agreement, including conveyances of real estate, as may be required by Ohio Law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing authorization shall not be limited in time or scope, unless otherwise directed or revoked by resolution of this Board.
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration and Treasurer
Re: City of Dublin Update
In concert with the due diligence process for the acquisition of 7001-7003 Post Road, Dublin, Ohio, university administrators have continued negotiations with the City of Dublin regarding the approximately 90 acres surrounding the fore-mentioned site. The resulting agreement, titled, “Economic Development Agreement by and between City of Dublin, Ohio and Ohio University,” is currently in the final stages of refinement.
Ordinance 22-12 has been introduced at the Dublin City Council to obtain their approval for the transaction. On April 9, 2012 Provost Benoit appeared before the City Council to provide an overview of the conceptual planning discussions that have taken place thus far. With authorization of the City Council, the Ordinance will proceed to a Second Reading/Public Hearing at their May meeting. Following the public hearing and discussion by Council, they will vote on the legislation. The anticipated date for execution of the agreement, pending Ohio University Board of Trustees authorization, is no later than June 30, 2012.
FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013 ATHENS CAMPUS INSTRUCTIONAL FEE, GENERAL FEE AND NON-RESIDENT SURCHARGE
RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, the Ohio University 2012-2013 Current Funds Budget contains fixed and mandated cost increases, and
WHEREAS, the Amended Substitute House Bill 153 allows the combined instructional and general fees for undergraduate students to increase by 3.5%, and
WHEREAS, the University is converting from quarters to semesters to support the Strategic Plan for Higher Education as part of the University System of Ohio, all fees have been neutrally converted and any requested increases have been applied after the conversion, and
WHEREAS, the appropriate planning and consultations within the University have been accomplished, resulting in recommendations of fee increases for purposes of investments in identified strategic priorities, and
WHEREAS, the planning and consultations within the University result in a recommendation of a combined 3.5% increase in instructional and general fees for undergraduate students on the Athens Campus, and
WHEREAS, the planning and consultations within the University result in a recommendation not to increase non-resident surcharge fees and the Athens campus graduate tuition and fees.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees adopts the proposed fee schedules (Attachments A and B), effective Fall Semester 2012, unless otherwise noted.
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 1 FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013 COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, REGIONAL CAMPUSES AND eLEARNING INSTRUCTIONAL FEE, GENERAL FEE AND NON-RESIDENT SURCHARGE
RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, the Ohio University 2012-2013 Current Funds Budget contains fixed and mandated cost increases, and
WHEREAS, the Amended Substitute House Bill 153 allows the combined instructional and general fees for undergraduate students to increase by 3.5%, and
WHEREAS, the University is converting from quarters to semesters to support the Strategic Plan for Higher Education as part of the University System of Ohio, all fees have been neutrally converted and any requested increases have been applied after the conversion, and
WHEREAS, the appropriate planning and consultations within the University have been accomplished, resulting in recommendations of fee increases for purposes of investments in identified strategic priorities, and
WHEREAS, the planning within the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine results in a recommendation of a 5% increase to the instructional fee, general fee, and non-resident surcharge and a credit hour table has been created for students taking less than a full load, and
WHEREAS, the planning within the Regional Campuses consolidates the upper and lower division rates into one rate for all campuses and then recommends for an increase in instructional fees for undergraduate students of 1.57%, and
WHEREAS, the planning within eLearning results in recommendations for an increase in program fees of $3 per hour for programs that will no longer receive the general fee as part of their revenue distribution and the Engineering Management program requests an additional increase in its program fee of $20 to make it more consistent with other programs in the college as it moves its program to the online format, and
WHEREAS, the planning within eLearning results in recommendations for new cohorts in the Masters of Financial Economics, Professional MBA and Professional Masters of Sports Administration programs with associated new program fee rates and any Specialized Services / Materials fees associated with the graduate programs will now be charged on a credit hour basis.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees adopts the proposed fee schedules (Attachments E, F, G), effective Fall Semester 2012, unless otherwise noted.
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 2
FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013 STUDENT COURSE, TECHNOLOGY AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES
RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, the Ohio University 2012-2013 Current Funds Budget will contain program enhancements as well as fixed and mandated cost increases, and
WHEREAS, the University is converting from quarters to semesters to support the Strategic Plan for Higher Education as part of the University System of Ohio, all fees have been neutrally converted and any requested increases have been applied after the conversion, and
WHEREAS, the planning and consultation within the University regarding student course and miscellaneous fees have been accomplished, resulting in recommendations of fee increases, and
WHEREAS, the planning and consultation within the University regarding technology fees have been accomplished, resulting in recommendations to increase the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine medical resources technology fee by 5% as well as establishing rates for students taking less than a full load, and
WHEREAS, the fee schedules for New or Increase Semester Broad Based Fees and Semester Student Course Fees are consistent with Amended Substitute House Bill 153.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees adopts the attached fee schedules (Attachments C, D, I, J), effective Fall Semester 2012.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees authorizes the President or his designee to make non-substantive adjustments to the fee schedules, including but not limited to changes in course and fee identification numbers.
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 3
FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013 RESIDENCE HALL AND DINING RATES
RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, sustained effort has been made to achieve financial stability for Ohio University’s Residence Hall and Dining Auxiliaries while providing necessary services for students, and
WHEREAS, the University is converting from quarters to semesters to support the Strategic Plan for Higher Education as part of the University System of Ohio, all fees have been neutrally converted and any requested increases have been applied after the conversion, and
WHEREAS, the Residence Hall and Dining Auxiliaries have planned for all operating expenses and debt service obligations by means of fees which are collected from students who use the residence halls and dining facilities, and
WHEREAS, the planning within the Athens Campus results in a recommendation of a 1.5% increase in board rates and a 3.5% increase in standard double room rates. The proposed rates for other types of rooms will vary to create a more consolidated and simplified rate structure more consistent with our peers. These changes have been phased in over two years, this being the second year, in order to support a self-sustaining, auxiliary housing operation, and
WHEREAS, the proposed fee schedules are consistent with Amended Substitute House Bill 153.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees adopts the attached schedule of fees (Attachment H), effective Fall Semester 2012.
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 4
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Steve Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration, CFO and Treasurer
Re: FY 2013 Proposed Student & Other Fee Adjustments
At the upcoming April Resources Committee meeting, board members will be asked to consider miscellaneous fees for approval. The categories of fees are as follows:
Request to Increase the Athens Campus Instructional & General Fees: The University seeks approval to increase the combined undergraduate instructional and general fees by 3.5% or $173 per semester for a full-time resident undergraduate. (See Attachment A)
Request to Increase College of Medicine Tuition & Fees: Consistent with the College of Medicine’s 5-year plan shared August 2007, the University will seek approval of a 5% increase to the instructional and general fee, non-resident surcharge and resource technology fee. In addition, rates for students taking less than a full load are also created. The proposed tuition and fee increases will support projected inflationary expenditure increases, expenses associated with increased enrollment, the college’s plan for Vision Ohio, accreditation-related activities, and expansion to the Columbus Campus. (See Attachment B)
Request to Increase Regional Campus and eLearning Tuition & Fees: Regional Campuses: The University seeks approval to consolidate the lower and upper division undergraduate tuition and non-resident surcharge on each regional campus to one rate for all campuses. On the consolidated rate, the university seeks approval to increase the instructional fee by 1.57%. (See Attachment E)
eLearning: The University seeks approval to increase the program fees for off-campus graduate programs by $3 per hour for programs that will no longer receive the general fee as part of their revenue distribution and the Engineering Management program requests an additional increase in its program fee of $20 to make it more consistent with other programs in that college as it moves its program to the online format. Approval is also sought for new cohorts in the Masters of Financial Economics, Professional MBA and Professional Masters of Sports Administration programs with associated new program fee rates, and these programs also previously included course fees for residency expenses that will now be listed as under a new column labeled Specialized Services / Materials that will be based on credit hours in the fee table. (See Attachment F, G)
Request for Approval of New/Increased Student & Other Fees: Please find attached to this memorandum a summary of student course fees, technology fees and miscellaneous fees for review and consideration. Attachments I and J, "New or Increase Semester Broad Based Fees" and “Semester Student Course Fees” present all the course fee conversions to semesters
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 5 along with increases to the fees for approval by the Board of Trustees. Adjustments are primarily requested to support the increased costs of consumable goods, employee compensation and voluntary activities. (See Attachment C, D, I & J)
Request for Approval of Room & Board Increases: The University will seek approval of 3.5% and 1.5% increases in room and board rates, respectively. The proposed rates will be used to support the overall 10-year capital plan for housing’s and dining’s deferred maintenance and major renovations. (See Attachment H)
To support the Strategic Plan for Higher Education, all of Ohio’s Public universities and colleges will be on academic calendars based on the semester system. The transition from quarters to semesters has required the conversion of every fee table. In most cases quarter rates were increased by 150% to translate the three quarters into two semesters which resulted in the annual charges being neutral. The transition for some areas uses a different conversion rate to ensure that the total charge for the program remains neutral. Specifically, the medical program will transition from 14 quarters to 10 semesters so that tuition table was converted using this conversion rate. In addition, off-campus graduate programs converted the total credit hours required for the program by different amounts. In these cases the ratio of hours required under quarters to hours required under semesters was used as the conversion rate to ensure that the total charged for the program would remain neutral after the transition to semesters. Any further fee conversions or increases requested will be presented at the June meeting.
I will be happy to answer any questions you have prior to the April meeting.
Materials included with this board agenda item are as follows:
Resolutions for Board Action (pages 1-4) . Instructional Fee, General Fee, and Non-Resident Surcharge . College of Medicine, Regional Campuses and eLearning Fees . Student Course, Technology and Miscellaneous Fees . Residence and Dining Hall Fee Rates
Fee Schedules (Attachments A thru J) . Attachment A: Undergraduate Resident Total and Non-Resident Surcharge Fee Schedule . Attachment B: Athens Campus Graduate Tuition and Fee Schedule . Attachment C: Technology Fee Schedule . Attachment D: SIS & Network Technology Fee Schedule . Attachment E: Regional Campuses Undergraduate . Attachment F: Independent and Distance Learning . Attachment G: eLearning and Off-Campus Graduate Programs . Attachment H: Residence & Dining Hall Rate Schedule . Attachment I: New or Increase Semester Broad Based Fees . Attachment J: Semester Student Course Fees
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 6
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 7
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 8
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 9
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 10
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 11
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 12
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 13
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 14 New or Increase Semester Broad‐Based Fees Fiscal Year: FY13 Athens Amount Office/Dept/School Fee Name FY13 Notes
Heritage College of Administrative Fee for Global Health Program $150.00 Osteopathic Medicine
Heritage College of Application for Admission Fee $60.00 Osteopathic Medicine
Heritage College of Basic Life Support Training $60.00 Optional training provided to students. Osteopathic Medicine Students may choose to take BLS training elsewhere.
Heritage College of Malpractice Insurance Fee $398.00 Maximum amount. Fee for students who Osteopathic Medicine study abroad. Fee is determined based on country and duration of study.
Heritage College of Medical Learning Resource Fee $445.00 Osteopathic Medicine
Office of Information Residence Hall Telephone Services Optional fee for students who request Technology telephone service in the residence halls. Monthly rate is $17.80 for analog line and $3.75 for voicemail. One‐time activation fee for analog line is $45.00. One‐time activation rate for voicemail is $22.50.
Residential Housing Bobcat Student Orientation Housing $34.00
Residential Housing Garage Parking $360.00 Optional fee for students who choose to purchase garage parking.
Attachment I Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Page 1 of 1
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 15 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences BIOS BIOS 1300 Principles of Human Anatomy and $45.00 Physiology I
BIOS BIOS 1310 Principles of Human Anatomy and $45.00 Physiology II
BIOS BIOS 1705 Biological Sciences I: Laboratory $80.00
BIOS BIOS 1715 Biological Sciences II Laboratory $80.00
BIOS BIOS 2035 Human Biology II Laboratory: Functional $60.00 Anatomy
BIOS BIOS 2215 Microbes and Humans, Laboratory $90.00
BIOS BIOS 3015 Human Anatomy Lab $75.00
BIOS BIOS 3030 Comparative Vertebrate Anatomy $80.00
BIOS BIOS 3105 Laboratory Genetics $95.00
BIOS BIOS 3205 Animal Cell Biology Laboratory $75.00
BIOS BIOS 3210 General Microbiology $95.00
BIOS BIOS 3420 Principles of Physiology $85.00
BIOS BIOS 3455 Human Physiology Laboratory $60.00
BIOS BIOS 3640 Forensic Biology $45.00
BIOS BIOS 3760 Field Ecology $65.00
BIOS BIOS 4135 Human Neuroscience Laboratory $65.00
BIOS BIOS 4290 Marine Biology $50.00
BIOS BIOS 4310 Aquatic Biology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 4360 Field Entomology $40.00
BIOS BIOS 4455 Physiology of Exercise Laboratory $60.00
BIOS BIOS 4635 Biological Chemistry Laboratory $80.00
BIOS BIOS 4650 Ichthyology $50.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 1 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 16 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences BIOS BIOS 4710 Ornithology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 4720 Herpetology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 4740 Mammalogy $60.00
BIOS BIOS 4865 Immunology Lab $70.00
BIOS BIOS 5135 Human Neuroscience Laboratory $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5210 General Microbiology $95.00
BIOS BIOS 5290 Marine Biology $50.00
BIOS BIOS 5310 Aquatic Biology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5360 Field Entomology $40.00
BIOS BIOS 5420 Principles of Physiology I $85.00
BIOS BIOS 5455 Physiology of Exercise Laboratory $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5710 Ornithology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5720 Herpetology $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5740 Mammalogy $60.00
BIOS BIOS 5865 Immunology Lab $70.00
CHEM CHEM 1210 Principles of Chemistry I $110.00
CHEM CHEM 1220 Principles of Chemistry II $110.00
CHEM CHEM 1500 Concepts in Chemistry $110.00
CHEM CHEM 1510 Fundamentals of Chemistry I $110.00
CHEM CHEM 1520 Fundamentals of Chemistry II $110.00
CHEM CHEM 2410L Analytical Chemistry I Lab $110.00
CHEM CHEM 3080 Organic Chemistry Laboratory $110.00
CHEM CHEM 3085 Organic Chemistry Laboratory $110.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 2 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 17 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences CHEM CHEM 3090 Organic Chemistry Laboratory II $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4310L Analytical Chemistry II Lab $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4530L Physical Chemistry I Laboratory $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4540L Physical Chemistry II Laboratory $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4601 Advanced Organic Laboratory $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4760L Advanced Inorganic Laboratory $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4870L Forensic Chemistry II Lab $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4880L COURSE PENDING APPROVAL $110.00
CHEM CHEM 4903 Biochemical Techniques $110.00
GEOG GEOG 1100 Physical Geography $3.00
GEOG GEOG 4712 Field Methods in Geography $10.00
GEOG GEOG 5712 Field Methods in Geography $10.00
GEOL GEOL 1010 Introduction to Geology $5.00
GEOL GEOL 3120 Earth Materials and Resources $18.00
GEOL GEOL 3150 Mineralogy $10.00
GEOL GEOL 3201 Igneous & Metamorphic Petrology $35.00
GEOL GEOL 3400 Principles of Paleontology $23.00
GEOL GEOL 3600 Structural Geology $85.00
GEOL GEOL 4080 Planetary Geology $148.00
GEOL GEOL 4440 Ichnology $35.00
GEOL GEOL 4480 Paleocology $25.00
GEOL GEOL 4541 Carbonate Depositional Systems II $1,400.00
GEOL GEOL 4760 Subsurface Methods $15.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 3 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 18 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences GEOL GEOL 4830 Field Hydrology $150.00
GEOL GEOL 4910 Field Geology $943.00
GEOL GEOL 5080 Planetary Geology $148.00
GEOL GEOL 5120 Earth Materials and Resources $18.00
GEOL GEOL 5400 Principles of Paleontology $23.00
GEOL GEOL 5440 Ichnology $35.00
GEOL GEOL 5480 Paleocology $25.00
GEOL GEOL 5541 Carbonate Depositional Systems II $1,400.00
GEOL GEOL 5760 Subsurface Methods $15.00
GEOL GEOL 5830 Field Hydrology $150.00
GEOL GEOL 5910 Field Geology $943.00
PBIO BIOL 1010 Principles of Biology $7.00
PBIO PBIO 1000L Plants and the Global Environment $6.00 Laboratory
PBIO PBIO 1140 Foundations of Plant Biology $35.00
PBIO PBIO 1150 Plant Structure and Development $15.00
PBIO PBIO 3010 Lab in Cell and Molecular Plant Physiology $45.00
PBIO PBIO 3050 Plant Propagation $10.00
PBIO PBIO 3080 Structural Botany $5.00
PBIO PBIO 3240 Plant Physiology $14.00
PBIO PBIO 3260 Physiological Plant Ecology $28.00
PBIO PBIO 4090 Plant Systematics and Survey of Vascular $21.00 Plant Families
PBIO PBIO 4280 Laboratory in Genomics Techniques $150.00
PBIO PBIO 4350 Plant Population Biology and Community $28.00 Ecology
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 4 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 19 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Arts and Sciences PBIO PBIO 4380 Soil Properties and Ecosystem Processes $14.00
PBIO PBIO 4420 Experimental Anatomy of Plant $25.00 Development
PBIO PBIO 5010 Lab in Cell and Molecular Plant Physiology $45.00
PBIO PBIO 5080 Anatomy and Morphology of Vascular $5.00 Plants
PBIO PBIO 5090 Plant Systematics and Survey of Vascular $21.00 Plant Families
PBIO PBIO 5260 Physiological Plant Ecology $28.00
PBIO PBIO 5280 Laboratory in Genomics Techniques $150.00
PBIO PBIO 5350 Plant Population Biology and Community $28.00 Ecology
PBIO PBIO 5380 Soil Properties and Ecosystem Processes $14.00
PBIO PBIO 5420 Experimental Anatomy of Plant $25.00 Development
PSY PSY 3240 Human Psychophysiology $10.00
ATHENS College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
MGT MGT 4580 Managing Transformations and $35.00 Organizational Change ATHENS College of Fine Arts ART ART 1100 Seeing and Knowing the Visual Arts $7.00
ART ART 1200 Description $52.00
ART ART 1210 Function $52.00
ART ART 1220 Image $52.00
ART ART 1230 Structure $52.00
ART ART 1240 Visual Art in Practice and Theory: Critical $7.00 Perspectives
ART ART 2210 Ceramics Hand Building $225.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 5 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 20 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts ART ART 2220 Ceramics Wheel Throwing $225.00
ART ART 2310 Sculpture: Contemporary Objects and $105.00 Traditions
ART ART 2320 Sculpture: Environments & Actions $150.00
ART ART 2330 Casting Contemporary Explorations $150.00
ART ART 2410 Lithography/Monotype $150.00
ART ART 2420 Etching/Relief $154.00
ART ART 2430 Screen/Paper $150.00
ART ART 2510 Graphic Design Principles $98.00
ART ART 2520 Typography $90.00
ART ART 2600 Environmental Design Studio I $300.00
ART ART 2620 Environmental Design Studio II $22.00
ART ART 2710 Traditional Practices in Painting $60.00
ART ART 2720 Experimental Drawing and Painting $150.00
ART ART 2810 Film Photography $112.00
ART ART 2820 Digital Photography $112.00
ART ART 2900 Studio Art Topics $180.00 Fee may range from $64.00 ‐ $180.00. Fee amount varies based on topic.
ART ART 2902 Figure and Gender $105.00
ART ART 3210 Advanced Ceramics $225.00
ART ART 3220 Glaze Calculation & Materials $225.00
ART ART 3310 Public Spheres & Dissemination Tactics $105.00
ART ART 3320 Content & Concept in Material & Form $105.00
ART ART 3410 Advanced Prints $165.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 6 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 21 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts ART ART 3420 Papermaking $135.00
ART ART 3510 Graphic Design Studio I $75.00
ART ART 3520 Graphic Design Studio II $75.00
ART ART 3530 Letterpress and Bookmaking $112.00
ART ART 3540 Media $75.00
ART ART 3550 Animation $120.00
ART ART 3600 Interior Architecture Studio I $22.00
ART ART 3620 Interior Architecture Studio II $22.00
ART ART 3710 Advanced Painting $60.00
ART ART 3810 Advanced Photography $68.00
ART ART 3820 Photographic Arts $112.00
ART ART 3900 Studio Art Topics $203.00 Fee may range from $75.00 ‐ $203.00. Fee amount varies based on topic.
ART ART 4000 Critique Community $135.00
ART ART 4510 Graphic Design Studio III $75.00
ART ART 4520 Graphic Design Studio IV $75.00
ART ART 4600 Interior Architecture Studio III $22.00
ART ART 4900 Studio Art Topics $169.00 Fee may range from $75.00 ‐ $169.00. Fee amount varies based on topic.
ART ART 4930 Independent Study‐Projects $7.00
ART ART 4932 Independent Study‐Readings $7.00
ART ART 4950 Studio Art BFA Practicum $30.00
ART ART 4952 Studio Art BFA Exhibit $38.00
ART ART 4954 Graphic Design Practicum $30.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 7 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 22 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts ART ART 4956 Graphic Design BFA Exhibit $38.00
ART ART 4958 Thesis Interior Architecture Studio $22.00
ART ART 5110 Digital Media $180.00
ART ART 5210 Ceramics $68.00
ART ART 5220 Ceramics $68.00
ART ART 5310 Sculpture $105.00
ART ART 5320 Sculpture $105.00
ART ART 5410 Printmaking $135.00
ART ART 5420 Printmaking $135.00
ART ART 5510 Graphic Design I $150.00
ART ART 5520 Graphic Design II $150.00
ART ART 5530 Letterpress and Bookmaking $98.00
ART ART 5710 Painting $30.00
ART ART 5720 Painting $30.00
ART ART 5810 Photography $68.00
ART ART 5900 Studio Art Topics $158.00 Fee may range from $50.00 ‐ $158.00. Fee amount varies based on topic.
ART ART 6210 Ceramics $68.00
ART ART 6220 Ceramics $68.00
ART ART 6310 Sculpture $105.00
ART ART 6320 Sculpture $105.00
ART ART 6410 Printmaking $135.00
ART ART 6420 Printmaking $135.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 8 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 23 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts ART ART 6520 Graphic Design III $150.00
ART ART 6710 Painting $30.00
ART ART 6720 Painting $30.00
ART ART 6810 Photography $90.00
ART ART 6820 Photography $30.00
ART ART 6950 Studio Art Written Thesis $150.00
ART ART 7960 MFA Studio Thesis $150.00 Fee may range from $75.00 ‐ $150.00. Fee amount varies based on type of thesis.
FILM FILM 3400 Film Techniques $225.00
FILM FILM 4710 Film Topics Seminar I $84.00
FILM FILM 5110 Filmmaking I $300.00
FILM FILM 5120 Filmmaking II $300.00
FILM FILM 5710 Film Topics Seminar I $84.00
FILM FILM 6500 Cinematography $112.00
MUS MUS 1411 Class Piano I Non‐Majors $38.00
MUS MUS 1471 Class Voice Non‐Majors $38.00
MUS MUS 1651 Class Folk Guitar for Non‐Music Majors I $38.00
MUS MUS 1661 Class Folk Guitar for Non‐music Majors II $38.00
MUS MUS 1780 Computer Skills for Musicians $60.00
MUS MUS 1820 Recreational Music Instruments and $38.00 Materials
MUS MUS 2610 Upper Strings Methods and Materials $38.00
MUS MUS 2611 Lower Strings Methods and Materials $38.00
MUS MUS 2630 Percussion Methods and Materials $38.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 9 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 24 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts MUS MUS 2631 High Brass Instrument Methods and $38.00 Materials
MUS MUS 2632 Trombone/Euphonium/Tuba Methods and $38.00 Materials
MUS MUS 2635 Flute, Saxophone & Clarinet Methods and $38.00 Materials
MUS MUS 2636 Double Reed Methods and Materials $38.00
MUS MUS 2920 Music Therapy Second‐Year Practicum $23.00
MUS MUS 3400 Voice $188.00 Students who register for more than one of the following MUS courses (MUS 3400 ‐ MUS 3580) are charged a maximum of $188 per semester.
MUS MUS 3410 Piano $188.00
MUS MUS 3430 Organ $188.00
MUS MUS 3440 Violin $188.00
MUS MUS 3450 Viola $188.00
MUS MUS 3460 Violoncello $188.00
MUS MUS 3470 Double Bass $188.00
MUS MUS 3480 Flute $188.00
MUS MUS 3490 Oboe $188.00
MUS MUS 3500 Bassoon $188.00
MUS MUS 3510 Clarinet $188.00
MUS MUS 3520 Saxophone $188.00
MUS MUS 3530 Trumpet $188.00
MUS MUS 3540 Horn $188.00
MUS MUS 3550 Euphonium $188.00
MUS MUS 3560 Trombone $188.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 10 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 25 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts MUS MUS 3570 Tuba $188.00
MUS MUS 3580 Percussion $188.00
MUS MUS 3920 Music Therapy Third‐Year Practicum $23.00
MUS MUS 4920 Music Therapy Fourth‐Year Practicum $23.00
MUS MUS 4930 Independent Project $150.00
MUS MUS 5920 Advanced Music Therapy Practicum $23.00
THAR THAR 1391 Fundamentals of Scenery, Props, Costumes $40.00 and Costume Crafts
THAR THAR 1392 Fundamentals of Lighting/Sound and Stage $38.00 Management
THAR THAR 2100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 2300 Practicum in Production Design $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 2350 Stagecraft: Scenery $30.00
THAR THAR 2360 Stagecraft: Costume Construction $90.00
THAR THAR 2600 Practicum in Production Stage Management $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 3100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 3162 Stage Combat $30.00
THAR THAR 3300 Practicum in Production Design $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 3319 Stage Electrics $45.00
THAR THAR 3330 Scene Painting $125.00
THAR THAR 3361 Costume Technology I: Pattern $75.00 Development and Construction
THAR THAR 3380 Introduction to Props and Crafts Techniques $115.00
THAR THAR 3390 Design Skills ‐ Figure Drawing and Costume $25.00 Illustration Techniques
THAR THAR 3393 Vectorworks for the Theater $30.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 11 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 26 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts THAR THAR 3600 Practicum in Production Stage Management $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 4100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 4200 Practicum‐Directing $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 4300 Practicum in Production Design $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 4352 Welding for the Theater $50.00
THAR THAR 4362 Costume Technology II: Advanced Pattern $75.00 Development and Construction
THAR THAR 4363 Costume Technology III: Theatrical Tailoring $100.00
THAR THAR 4370 Theatrical Sound Design $30.00
THAR THAR 4371 Theatrical Sound Production $39.00
THAR THAR 4381 Advanced Crafts Techniques $130.00
THAR THAR 4382 Advanced Properties Construction and $100.00 Organization for the Stage
THAR THAR 4383 Advanced Props Techniques: Furniture $100.00 Construction
THAR THAR 4384 Advanced Props Techniques: Steel Work $100.00
THAR THAR 4600 Practicum in Stage Management: Senior $10.00 Per Credit Hour Project
THAR THAR 4700 Practicum in Dramaturgy $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 5100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 5200 Practicum in Directing $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 5300 Practicum in Design and/or Technical $10.00 Per Credit Hour Production
THAR THAR 5319 Stage Electrics $45.00
THAR THAR 5330 Scene Painting $125.00
THAR THAR 5352 Welding for the Theater $50.00
THAR THAR 5360 Costume Construction Techniques for the $90.00 Stage
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 12 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 27 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts THAR THAR 5361 Costume Technology I: Pattern $75.00 Development and Construction
THAR THAR 5362 Costume Technology II: Advanced Pattern $75.00 Development and Construction
THAR THAR 5363 Costume Technology III: Theatrical Tailoring $98.00
THAR THAR 5364 Costume Technology IV: Specialized $75.00 Silhouettes and Construction
THAR THAR 5365 Costume Technology V: Rendering $75.00 Interpretation
THAR THAR 5370 Theatrical Sound Design $30.00
THAR THAR 5371 Theatrical Sound Production $39.00
THAR THAR 5380 Props and Crafts Techniques $115.00
THAR THAR 5381 Advanced Crafts Techniques $130.00
THAR THAR 5382 Advanced Properties Construction and $100.00 Organization for the Stage
THAR THAR 5383 Advanced Props Techniques: Furniture $100.00 Construction
THAR THAR 5384 Advanced Props Techniques: Steel Work $100.00
THAR THAR 5390 Design Skills ‐ Figure Drawing and Costume $25.00 Illustration Techniques
THAR THAR 5393 Vectorworks for the Theater $30.00
THAR THAR 5600 Practicum in Production Stage Management $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 5700 Practicum in Dramaturgy $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 6100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 6162 Stage Combat $30.00
THAR THAR 6200 Practicum in Directing $10.00 Per Credit Hour
THAR THAR 6300 Practicum in Design and/or Technical $10.00 Per Credit Hour Production
THAR THAR 7100 Practicum in Acting $10.00 Per Credit Hour
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 13 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 28 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Fine Arts THAR THAR 7300 Practicum in Design and/or Technical $10.00 Per Credit Hour Production
THAR THAR 7370 Seminar: Sound $35.00
ATHENS College of Health Sciences and Professions AHSW AT 1002 Clinical Skills in Athletic Training $45.00
AHSW AT 2102 Lower Extremity Examination Gross $70.00 Anatomy Lab
AHSW AT 2152 Upper Extremity Examination Gross $70.00 Anatomy Lab
AHSW AT 3100 Orthopedic Appliances $50.00
AHSW AT 6210 Human Anatomy for Athletic Trainers $125.00
AHSW EXPH 2280 Community First Aid, and CPR/AED for the $49.00 Professional Rescuer
AHSW EXPH 2490 Exercise Testing and Prescription $25.00
AHSW EXPH 3020 Biomechanics and Applied Kinesiology $15.00
AHSW EXPH 3280 CPR/AED for the Professional Rescuer $111.00 Instructor and First Aid Instructor
AHSW EXPH 4150 Physiology of Exercise Lab $40.00
AHSW EXPH 4490 Cardiovascular Assessments in Exercise $15.00 Physiology
AHSW EXPH 5150 Physiology of Exercise Lab $40.00
AHSW NUTR 1100 Introduction to Food Systems $42.00
AHSW NUTR 2200 Science of Food I $85.00
AHSW NUTR 2220 Science of Food II $85.00
AHSW NUTR 3100 Medical Nutrition Therapy I $30.00
AHSW NUTR 3350 Introduction to Food Production $105.00
AHSW NUTR 4000 Nutrition in the Community $35.00
AHSW NUTR 4100 Medical Nutrition Therapy II $70.00
AHSW NUTR 4200 Experimental Foods $115.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 14 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 29 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Health Sciences and Professions AHSW NUTR 4920 Nutrition Counseling Practicum $45.00
AHSW NUTR 5000 Nutrition in the Community $35.00
AHSW NUTR 5100 Medical Nutrition Therapy I $30.00
AHSW NUTR 5105 Medical Nutrition Therapy II $70.00
AHSW NUTR 5200 Experimental Foods $115.00
AHSW NUTR 5920 Nutrition Counseling Practicum $45.00
AHSW NUTR 6200 Advanced Food Science $115.00
NRSE NRSE 2110 Clinical Judgment II $50.00
NRSE NRSE 2220 Foundations of Nursing Practice $180.00
NRSE NRSE 2230 Health Assessment $230.00
NRSE NRSE 2240 Pharmacology in Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 3120 Professional Topics: Ethics, Diversity, and $80.00 Gerontology
NRSE NRSE 3130 Nursing Care of Adults I $230.00
NRSE NRSE 3140 Mental Health Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 3230 Nursing Care of Adults II $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4120 Management and Leadership in Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 4140 Nursing Care of Children and Families $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4150 Nursing Care of Populations: Family and $80.00 Community
NRSE NRSE 4400 Professional Practice in Nursing $160.00
NRSE NRSE 6010 Theoretical Basis of Practice $75.00
NRSE NRSE 6220 Advanced Health Appraisal $55.00
NRSE NRSE 6221 Health Appraisal for Nurse Practitioners $55.00
NRSE NRSE 6920 Nursing Care of Women $120.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 15 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 30 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS College of Health Sciences and Professions NRSE NRSE 6921 Primary Care of Adults $120.00
NRSE NRSE 6922 Nursing Care of Children $55.00
NRSE NRSE 6923 Family Nurse Practitioner in Practice $55.00
NRSE NRSE 6924 Complex Adult Health Problems I $120.00
NRSE NRSE 6925 Complex Adult Health Problems II $120.00
NRSE NRSE 6926 Critical Care Concepts and Practice $120.00
NRSE NRSE 6927 Acute Care Nurse Practitioner and Practice $55.00
RCS CSD 6030 Neuroscience of Communication $60.00
RCS CSD 6340 Clinical Methods in Speech‐Language $30.00 Pathology
RCS CSD 6351 Professional Education in Audiology I $30.00
RCS CSD 7351 Professional Education in Audiology II $30.00
RCS PT 7010 Anatomical Dissection for Physical $275.00 Therapists
RCS PT 7030 Clinical Skills and Examination I $42.00
RCS PT 7310 Professional Communication and $34.00 Documentation
RCS PT 7710 Orthopedics I: Upper Quarter $26.00
RCS PT 8920 Clinical Practicum I $29.00
RCS PT 8921 Clinical Practicum II $29.00
SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
ATHENS Patton College of Education HCSE CONS 4953 Workshop in Customer Service $80.00
HCSE CONS 5953 Workshop in Customer Service $80.00
HCSE RFPD 1500 Design and Illustration Techniques $15.00
HCSE RFPD 1600 Color Theory for Visual Merchandising $15.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 16 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 31 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Patton College of Education HCSE RFPD 2150 Elementary Textiles $15.00
HCSE RFPD 3830 Product Development, Evaluation, and $15.00 Distribution
HCSE RFPD 4200 COURSE PENDING APPROVAL $3,000.00 New York Study Tour
HCSE RHT 2990 Introductory Food Preparation $90.00
HCSE RHT 3401 COURSE PENDING APPROVAL $3,000.00 Hospitality and Nutrition Study Tour
HCSE T3 4722 Food and Culture of the Mediterranean $50.00
RSP COED 2510 Techniques and Tactics of Golf $20.00
RSP PED 1001 Aerobic Conditioning $5.00
RSP PED 1005 Yoga $5.00
RSP PED 1006 Pilates $5.00
RSP PED 1007 Aerobics $5.00
RSP PED 1009 Group Fitness and Exercise $5.00
RSP PED 1100 Basketball $5.00
RSP PED 1101 Lacrosse $5.00
RSP PED 1102 Softball $5.00
RSP PED 1103 Fundamentals of Volleyball $5.00
RSP PED 1104 Ultimate Frisbee $5.00
RSP PED 1105 Broomball $5.00
RSP PED 1106 Ice Hockey $15.00
RSP PED 1108 Soccer $5.00
RSP PED 1109 Flag Football $5.00
RSP PED 1110 Team Handball $5.00
RSP PED 1111 Field Hockey $5.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 17 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 32 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Patton College of Education RSP PED 1202 Fundamentals of Golf $20.00
RSP PED 1203 Badminton $5.00
RSP PED 1206 Bowling $32.00
RSP PED 1208 Archery $5.00
RSP PED 1209 Fundamentals of Ice Skating $15.00
RSP PED 1301 Fundamentals of Swimming $15.00
RSP PED 1401 Fundamentals of Horseback Western Seat $250.00
RSP PED 1402 Intermediate Horseback Western Seat $250.00
RSP PED 1403 Advanced Horseback Western Seat $250.00
RSP PED 1410 Fundamentals of Horseback Hunt Seat $250.00
RSP PED 1411 Intermediate Horseback Hunt Seat $250.00
RSP PED 1412 Advanced Horseback Hunt Seat $250.00
RSP PED 2103 Intermediate Volleyball $5.00
RSP PED 2301 Intermediate Swimming $15.00
RSP PED 2801 Advanced Swimming $15.00
RSP PESS 2180 Life Guard Training $45.00
RSP PESS 2200 Water Safety for Instructors $45.00
RSP PESS 3800 Life Guard Training Instructor $45.00
RSP REC 1000 Wilderness Living Skills $35.00
RSP REC 1005 Winter Wilderness Living Skills $95.00
RSP REC 1030 Wilderness Survival $35.00
RSP REC 1080 Fundamentals of Rock Climbing $55.00
RSP REC 1081 Sport Rock Climbing $90.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 18 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 33 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Patton College of Education RSP REC 1082 Traditional Rock Climbing $90.00
RSP REC 1083 Rock Climbing Rescue $55.00
RSP REC 1110 Cross Country Snow Skiing $95.00
RSP REC 1130 Fundamentals of Canoeing $30.00
RSP REC 1131 Whitewater Canoeing $100.00
RSP REC 1132 Canoe Touring $475.00
RSP REC 1140 Fundamentals of Kayaking $30.00
RSP REC 1141 Whitewater Kayaking $100.00
RSP REC 1142 Coastal Kayaking $100.00
RSP REC 1143 Kayak Touring $475.00
RSP REC 1150 Whitewater Rafting $100.00
RSP REC 1180 Sailing $85.00
RSP REC 1190 Caving $90.00
RSP REC 1200 Mountain Biking $20.00
RSP REC 1220 Scuba Diver $288.00
RSP REC 2150 Outdoor Recreation and Education $30.00
RSP REC 3110 Expedition Planning & Management $115.00
RSP REC 3120 Wilderness First Responder $220.00
RSP REC 3210 Canoe Instructor Certification $295.00
RSP REC 3220 Whitewater Kayak Instructor Certification $295.00
RSP REC 3230 Swift Water Rescue $100.00
RSP REC 3240 Outdoor Leadership $795.00
RSP REC 3270 Coastal Kayak Instructor Certification $295.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 19 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 34 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Patton College of Education RSP REC 5240 Outdoor Leadership $795.00
TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $30.00
TEDU EDEC 3801 Play and Creativity in Early Childhood $15.00 Education
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $30.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $30.00
TEDU EDSP 4850 Assessment of Learners with Special Needs $22.00
TEDU EDSP 5730 Assessment of Learners with Special Needs $22.00
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
TEDU EDTE 5400 New Programs and Practices in Science $30.00
TEDU EDTE 6931 Methods for Teaching Earth/Life/ and $30.00 Physical Science ATHENS Russ College of Engineering and Technology AVN AVN 2400 Private Pilot Flight Course $9,866.00
AVN AVN 2403 Private Pilot Flight Transfer Course $3,163.00
AVN AVN 3400 Cross‐Country Flight $9,386.00
AVN AVN 4000 Instrument Flight Course $7,349.00
AVN AVN 4050 Advanced Cross Country Flight $9,386.00
AVN AVN 4150 Instrument Proficiency Check $1,612.00
AVN AVN 4200 Commercial Flight $4,806.00
AVN AVN 4300 Multi‐Engine Flight Course $7,050.00
AVN AVN 4450 Flight Instructor Flight Course $5,014.00
AVN AVN 4550 Instrument Instructor Flight Course $4,464.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 20 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 35 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Russ College of Engineering and Technology AVN AVN 4620 Multi‐Engine Cross‐Country Flight Course $3,535.00
AVN AVN 4650 Flight Instructor Operations ‐ Multi‐Engine $4,192.00
AVN AVN 4700 ATP Multi‐Engine Flight Course $4,577.00
AVN AVN 4850 Advanced Aircraft and Flight Crew $323.00 Operations
ETM ETM 1120 Introduction to Manufacturing Operations $85.00
ETM ETM 2080 Industrial Plastics $40.00
ETM ETM 2180 Metal Fabrication and Casting $30.00
ETM ETM 3070 Manufacturing Design & Laboratory $80.00
ETM ETM 3320 Electronics $50.00
ETM ETM 3470 Plastics Molding Processes $30.00
ETM ETM 3480 Plastics Forming and Composites $30.00 Fabrication
ETM ETM 3490 Plastics Tooling $30.00
ETM ETM 3510 Metal Machining, CNC, & Production $90.00 Tooling
ETM ETM 3540 Automatic Identification and Data Capture $10.00
ETM ETM 3570 Production Metal Machining $80.00
ETM ETM 3610 Product Design $35.00
ETM ETM 4350 Automation, Robotics & Control Systems $25.00
ETM ETM 4620 Operations and Production Capstone $70.00
ME ME 4701 Mechanical Engineering Capstone Design I $20.00
ME ME 4702 Mechanical Engineering Capstone Design II $20.00
ATHENS Scripps College of Communication JOUR JOUR 3500 Radio and Television Reporting and Writing $20.00
JOUR JOUR 4870 News and Information Capstone $40.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 21 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 36 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Scripps College of Communication VICO VICO 1014 Introduction to Visual Communication $35.00 Skills: Design
VICO VICO 1021 Introduction to Visual Communication $30.00 Skills: Photography
VICO VICO 1115 Visual Communication Design I $35.00
VICO VICO 1422 Visual Communication Photography $40.00
VICO VICO 2111 Design II: Informational Graphics $35.00
VICO VICO 2221 Commercial Photography I: Introduction $35.00
VICO VICO 2227 Commercial Photography II: Fashion and $35.00 portraiture
VICO VICO 2392 Photojournalism II: Picture Story $35.00
VICO VICO 2400 Illustration I: Digital Imaging $35.00
VICO VICO 2435 Visual Communication Picture Editing $35.00
VICO VICO 3115 Design III: Advanced Publication Design $35.00
VICO VICO 3141 Illustration II: Editorial Illustration $35.00
VICO VICO 3173 Interactive III: Interactive Media $15.00
VICO VICO 3450 Visual Communication Traditional $60.00 Darkroom techniques
VICO VICO 4112 Illustration Capstone: Advanced $35.00 Informational Graphics
VICO VICO 4188 Interactive Capstone: Advanced Interactive $30.00 Media
VICO VICO 4227 Commercial Photography IV: Business and $75.00 Studio Practices
VICO VICO 4229 Advanced Photographic Illustration: $75.00 Applications
VICO VICO 4321 Documentary and Essay Photojournalism $35.00
VICO VICO 4386 Photojournalism Capstone $35.00
VICO VICO 4387 Advanced Photographic Reportage $75.00
VICO VICO 4470 Graphics Systems Management $20.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 22 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 37 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ATHENS Scripps College of Communication VICO VICO 4930 Individual Study $20.00
VICO VICO 5014 Information Design Basics $35.00
VICO VICO 5111 Visual Communication Design II: $35.00 Informational Graphics
VICO VICO 5112 Advanced Informational Graphics $35.00
VICO VICO 5115 Design III: Advanced Publication Layout and $35.00 Design
VICO VICO 5173 Interactive III: Interactive Media $15.00
VICO VICO 5227 Commercial Photography II: Fashion and $75.00 portraiture
VICO VICO 5386 Photojournalism Story $35.00
VICO VICO 5387 Advanced Photographic Reportage: $75.00 Magazine
VICO VICO 5400 Illustration I: Digital Imaging $35.00
VICO VICO 5435 Visual Communication Picture Editing $35.00
VICO VICO 5450 Visual Communication Traditional $60.00 Darkroom Techniques
VICO VICO 6141 Illustration II: Editorial Illustration $35.00
VICO VICO 6188 Interactive Capstone: Advanced Interactive $15.00 Media
VICO VICO 6227 Commercial Photography IV: Business and $75.00 Studio Practices
VICO VICO 6229 Advanced Photographic Illustration: $75.00 Applications
VICO VICO 6470 Management in Visual Communication $20.00
VICO VICO 6930 Individual Study $20.00
CHILLICOTHE College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
CHILLICOTHE College of Fine Arts ART ART 1161 Introduction to Ceramics $50.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 23 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 38 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 CHILLICOTHE College of Fine Arts ART ART 2210 Ceramics Hand Building $50.00
ART ART 2220 Ceramics Wheel Throwing $50.00
ART ART 2810 Ceramics Wheel Throwing $50.00
CHILLICOTHE College of Health Sciences and Professions AHSW EXPH 2280 Community First Aid, and CPR/AED for the $30.00 Professional Rescuer
NRSE NRSE 2110 Clinical Judgment II $50.00
NRSE NRSE 3120 Professional Topics: Ethics, Diversity, and $80.00 Gerontology
NRSE NRSE 3130 Nursing Care of Adults I $230.00
NRSE NRSE 3140 Mental Health Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 3230 Nursing Care of Adults II $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4120 Management and Leadership in Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 4140 Nursing Care of Children and Families $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4150 Nursing Care of Populations: Family and $80.00 Community
NRSE NRSE 4400 Professional Practice in Nursing $160.00
NRSE NURS 1110 Foundations of Nursing and Assessment $190.00 Across the Lifespan
NRSE NURS 1130 Nursing Pharmacology: ADN $120.00
NRSE NURS 1210 Adult Health I: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2030 Licensed Practical Nurse to Registered $275.00 Nurse Transition
NRSE NURS 2110 Adult Health II: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2210 Adult Health III: ADN $190.00
SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
CHILLICOTHE Patton College of Education HCSE CONS 4953 Workshop in Customer Service $120.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 24 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 39 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 CHILLICOTHE Patton College of Education HCSE CONS 5953 Workshop in Customer Service $120.00
RSP COED 2510 Techniques and Tactics of Golf $75.00
RSP PED 1202 Fundamentals of Golf $35.00
RSP PED 1206 Bowling $52.00
RSP PED 2202 Intermediate Golf $75.00
TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $45.00
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $45.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $45.00
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
EASTERN College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
EASTERN College of Health Sciences and Professions SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
EASTERN Patton College of Education RSP REC 1150 Whitewater Rafting $110.00
TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $30.00
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $30.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $30.00
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
ECAMPUS College of Business
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 25 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 40 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ECAMPUS College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ECAMPUS Russ College of Engineering and Technology ISE EMGT **** All EMGT Courses $42.00
LANCASTER College of Arts and Sciences BIOS BIOS 1300 Principles of Human Anatomy and $45.00 Physiology I
BIOS BIOS 1310 Principles of Human Anatomy and $45.00 Physiology II
BIOS BIOS 1700 Biological Sceinces I: Molecules and Cells $31.00
BIOS BIOS 1715 Biological Sciences II Laboratory $50.00
BIOS BIOS 2010 Elementary Microbiology $25.00
CHEM CHEM 1210 Principles of Chemistry I $35.00
CHEM CHEM 1220 Principles of Chemistry II $35.00
CHEM CHEM 1500 Concepts in Chemistry $35.00
CHEM CHEM 1510 Fundamentals of Chemistry I $35.00
CHEM CHEM 1520 Fundamentals of Chemistry II $35.00
PBIO BIOL 1010 Principles of Biology $7.00
LANCASTER College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
LANCASTER College of Fine Arts ART ART 1121 Introduction to Drawing $30.00
ART ART 1151 Introduction to Painting $50.00
ART ART 1161 Introduction to Ceramics $50.00
ART ART 1190 COURSE PENDING APPROVAL $50.00
ART ART 1200 Description $30.00
ART ART 1210 Function $30.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 26 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 41 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 LANCASTER College of Fine Arts ART ART 1220 Image $30.00
ART ART 1230 Structure $30.00
ART ART 1240 Visual Art in Practice and Theory: Critical $7.00 Perspectives
ART ART 2210 Ceramics Hand Building $35.00
ART ART 2220 Ceramics Wheel Throwing $35.00
ART ART 2720 Experimental Drawing and Painting $35.00
ART ART 2902 Figure and Gender $50.00
LANCASTER College of Health Sciences and Professions AHSW EXPH 2280 Community First Aid, and CPR/AED for the $25.00 Professional Rescuer
AHSW NUTR 2200 Science of Food I $40.00
AHSW NUTR 2220 Science of Food II $40.00
AHSW NUTR 4200 Experimental Foods $40.00
SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
LANCASTER Patton College of Education C&HE EDCE 4000 Special Topics in Guidance, Counseling, and $40.00 Student Personnel
HCSE CONS 4953 Workshop in Customer Service $80.00
HCSE CONS 5953 Workshop in Customer Service $80.00
HCSE RHT 4390 Restaurant Operations $40.00
RSP COED 2510 Techniques and Tactics of Golf $45.00
RSP PED 1202 Fundamentals of Golf $20.00
RSP PED 1206 Bowling $45.00
RSP PED 2202 Intermediate Golf $45.00
RSP REC 1100 Fly Fishing $‐00 Student fee proposal not recommended for approval.
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 27 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 42 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 LANCASTER Patton College of Education TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $30.00
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $30.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $30.00
TEDU EDSP 5740 Behavioral Management for Learners with $22.00 Special Needs
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
TEDU EDTE 4900 Special Topics in Education ‐ Teacher $50.00 Education LANCASTER Regional Higher Education OUL CTCH 1891 Internetworking I $100.00
OUL CTCH 1892 Internetworking II $100.00
OUL CTCH 1893 Internetworking III $100.00
OUL CTCH 1894 Internetworking IV $100.00
SOUTHERN College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
SOUTHERN College of Fine Arts ART ART 1100 Seeing and Knowing the Visual Arts $5.00
ART ART 1111 Introduction to Digital Art $20.00
ART ART 1121 Introduction to Drawing $20.00
ART ART 1141 Introduction to Digital Photography $20.00
ART ART 1151 Introduction to Painting $30.00
ART ART 1161 Introduction to Ceramics $30.00
ART ART 1171 Introduction to Printmaking $25.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 28 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 43 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 SOUTHERN College of Fine Arts ART ART 1181 Introduction to Graphic Design $20.00
ART ART 2210 Ceramics Hand Building $30.00
ART ART 2310 Sculpture: Contemporary Objects and $30.00 Traditions
ART ART 2420 Etching/Relief $45.00
ART ART 2710 Traditional Practices in Painting $20.00
ART ART 2720 Experimental Drawing and Painting $50.00
ART ART 2902 Figure and Gender $20.00
ART ART 3420 Papermaking $35.00
ART ART 3530 Letterpress and Bookmaking $50.00
ART ART 3540 Media $50.00
ART ART 3990 Autopsical Art $‐00 Student fee proposal not recommended for approval.
SOUTHERN College of Health Sciences and Professions NRSE NRSE 2110 Clinical Judgment II $50.00
NRSE NRSE 3120 Professional Topics: Ethics, Diversity, and $80.00 Gerontology
NRSE NRSE 3130 Nursing Care of Adults I $230.00
NRSE NRSE 3140 Mental Health Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 3230 Nursing Care of Adults II $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4120 Management and Leadership in Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 4140 Nursing Care of Children and Families $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4150 Nursing Care of Populations: Family and $80.00 Community
NRSE NRSE 4400 Professional Practice in Nursing $160.00
NRSE NURS 1110 Foundations of Nursing and Assessment $190.00 Across the Lifespan
NRSE NURS 1130 Nursing Pharmacology: ADN $120.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 29 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 44 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 SOUTHERN College of Health Sciences and Professions NRSE NURS 1210 Adult Health I: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2030 Licensed Practical Nurse to Registered $275.00 Nurse Transition
NRSE NURS 2110 Adult Health II: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2210 Adult Health III: ADN $190.00
SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
SOUTHERN Patton College of Education RSP PED 1211 Fundamentals of Snow Skiing $50.00
RSP PED 2211 Intermediate Snow Skiing $50.00
TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $30.00
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $30.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $30.00
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
SOUTHERN Regional Higher Education OUS EQU 1000 Equine Studies: Introduction to Equines $188.00 and Their Industry
OUS EQU 1010 Basic Equine Health Care $188.00
OUS EQU 1020 Basic Horse Handling $188.00
OUS EQU 1030 Practical Experience in Equine Facility $188.00 Management I
OUS EQU 1040 Practical Experience in Equine Facility $188.00 Management II
OUS EQU 1060 Introduction to Western Riding $188.00
OUS EQU 1061 Introduction to English Riding $188.00
OUS EQU 1062 Equestrian Teaching Techniques $188.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 30 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 45 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 SOUTHERN Regional Higher Education OUS EQU 1070 Equine Nutrition $188.00
OUS EQU 1071 Equine Evaluation and Selection $188.00
OUS EQU 2030 Farm Design and Stable Management $188.00
OUS EQU 2031 Equine Business Management $188.00
OUS EQU 2032 Pasture Establishment and Management $188.00
OUS EQU 2040 Basic Horse Shoeing $188.00
OUS EQU 2041 Comprehensive and Competitive Horse $188.00 Judging
OUS EQU 2042 Horse Show and Event Management $188.00
OUS EQU 2050 Ohio University Southern Equestrian Teams $188.00
OUS EQU 2060 Advanced Western Riding $188.00
OUS EQU 2061 Advanced English Riding $188.00
OUS EQU 2063 Training and Evaluating Horses for Lesson $188.00 Programs
OUS EQU 2071 Equine Anatomy and Physiology $188.00
OUS EQU 2072 Equine Lameness and Conditioning $188.00
OUS EQU 2073 Equine Reproduction $188.00
OUS EQU 2074 Equine Veterinary Technology $188.00
OUS EQU 2080 Therapeutic Riding: Overview and $188.00 Instruction
OUS EQU 2081 Administrative Aspects of Therapeutic $188.00 Riding
OUS EQU 2910 Equine Internship $188.00
OUS EQU 2990 Studies in Equine Issues $188.00
ZANESVILLE College of Arts and Sciences PBIO PBIO 3330 Restoration Ecology $30.00
ZANESVILLE College of Business
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 31 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 46 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ZANESVILLE College of Business ACCT ACCT 1010 Foundations of Accounting $25.00
ACCT ACCT 1020 Decision Making with Accounting $15.00
ZANESVILLE College of Health Sciences and Professions NRSE NRSE 2110 Clinical Judgment II $50.00
NRSE NRSE 3120 Professional Topics: Ethics, Diversity, and $80.00 Gerontology
NRSE NRSE 3130 Nursing Care of Adults I $230.00
NRSE NRSE 3140 Mental Health Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 3230 Nursing Care of Adults II $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4120 Management and Leadership in Nursing $80.00
NRSE NRSE 4140 Nursing Care of Children and Families $230.00
NRSE NRSE 4150 Nursing Care of Populations: Family and $80.00 Community
NRSE NRSE 4400 Professional Practice in Nursing $160.00
NRSE NURS 1110 Foundations of Nursing and Assessment $190.00 Across the Lifespan
NRSE NURS 1130 Nursing Pharmacology: ADN $120.00
NRSE NURS 1210 Adult Health I: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2030 Licensed Practical Nurse to Registered $275.00 Nurse Transition
NRSE NURS 2110 Adult Health II: ADN $190.00
NRSE NURS 2210 Adult Health III: ADN $190.00
SPH SW 4921 Field Seminar I $10.00
ZANESVILLE Patton College of Education RSP PED 1202 Fundamentals of Golf $60.00
RSP PED 1211 Fundamentals of Snow Skiing $185.00
RSP PED 2202 Intermediate Golf $60.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 32 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 47 Semester Student Course Fees Fiscal Year: FY13
Amount Dept/School Course ID Course Title Notes FY13 ZANESVILLE Patton College of Education RSP PED 2211 Intermediate Snow Skiing $185.00
RSP REC 1150 Whitewater Rafting $110.00
TEDU EDEC 3400 Teaching Science in Early Childhood P‐3 $30.00
TEDU EDMC 3400 Teaching Middle Childhood Science $30.00
TEDU EDPL 4650 Professional Intership Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDPL 5650 Professional Internship Seminar $285.00
TEDU EDSE 4400 Secondary School Science Methods $30.00
TEDU EDTE 2020 Field Experience in Education $120.00
Wednesday, April 04, 2012 Attachment J Page 33 of 33
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 48 FY2013 Tuition and Fees Resolutions
Tab
Proposed FY 2013 Fees Rate Increases
Instruction & General Non-Resident Tuition and Fees Fee Surcharge Athens Campus Undergraduate 3.5% 0% Athens Campus Graduate 0% 0% Heritage College of Medicine 5.0% 5.0% Regional Campus Undergraduate 1.57% * 0% * * Regional rates have been collapsed into one rate table for all campuses
FY 2012-2013 Room & Board Increase Standard Double Room 3.5% Meal Plans (excl flex point plans) 1.5%
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 49 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Semester Conversion
For most fees, quarter rates were increased by 150% to translate from three quarters to two semesters, keeping the annual charges neutral. The medical program will transition from 14 quarters to 10 semesters so that tuition table was converted using this conversion rate. Off-campus graduate programs were converted using the ratio of hours required under quarters to hours required under semesters to ensure that the total charged for the program would remain neutral.
Proposed FY 2013 Fees Athens Campus Athens Instructional and General Fee The University seeks approval to increase the combined undergraduate instructional and general fees by 3.5% or $173 per semester for a full-time resident undergraduate This tuition increase will be used to support strategic investments and inflationary cost pressures Graduate tuition and Non Resident fees for undergraduate and graduate students remain unchanged
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 50 Proposed FY 2013 Fees HCOM HCOM Tuition, Non-Resident and General Fee The University seeks approval to increase the instructional fees, non-resident fee, and general fee by 5% Even with this increase the HCOM tuition will remain among the lowest in the state for medical schools The proposed increases will support projected inflationary expenditure increases and investments in medical research and programs
Proposed FY 2013 Fees Regional Campuses
Regional Campus Instructional and Non-resident Fees The University seeks approval to consolidate the lower and upper division tuition and non-resident surcharge to one rate for all campuses. On the consolidated rate, the university seeks approval to increase the instructional fee by 1.57%. While the consolidated fee will increase fees up to 8% for certain student populations while lowering rates close to 6% for others, Regional Campus leadership believe this adjustment will not affect affordability nor enrollment, and is in the long-term best interest of all campuses
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 51 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Housing and Dining Auxiliaries Room and Board Rates The University seeks approval of a 3.5% increase in standard double room rates and a 1.5% increase in board rates. FY’13 is the second year of a phased consolidation of rates based on room type. The simplified rate structure creates greater comparability with our peers. Rate increases for each auxiliary will address inflationary pressures while meeting their long-term capital improvement plans
Proposed FY 2013 Fees eLearning & Off-campus Graduate
The University seeks approval to increase the program fees for off- campus graduate programs by $3 per hour for programs that will transition general fee revenues to Athens Campus programming
The Engineering Management program requests an additional increase in its program fee of $20 to make it more consistent with other programs in that college as it moves its program to the online format.
Approval is also sought for new cohorts in the Masters of Financial Economics, Professional MBA and Professional Masters of Sports Administration programs . New program fee rates . Reclassifying course fees for residency expenses as a separate fee labeled Specialized Services / Materials (based on credit hours)
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 52 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Student & Other Fees
The Budget Planning Council sub-committee for Student Course fees reviewed all course fees to determine appropriate conversion from quarters to semesters. We are recommending increases to 8 broad based fees including a 5% increase to HCOM Medical Learning Resource Fee ($445 per semester)
Proposed FY 2013 Fees Pending
The following are still under review and may be presented at the June Board Meeting College of Education Technology Fee Other Off-campus Graduate Programs
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 53 Proposed FY 2013 Fees Resolutions
Four FY 2013 Tuition and Fee Resolutions: Athens Campus Instructional Fee, General Fee and Non-resident Surcharge College of Medicine, Regional Campuses and eLearning Instructional Fee, General Fee and Non-resident Surcharge Student Course, Technology and Miscellaneous Fees Residence Hall and Dining Rates
FY2013 Tuition & Fees - Page 54 OHIO UNIVERSITY OIL AND GAS RIGHTS
RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the General Assembly of the State of Ohio passed H.B. No. 133, effective September 30, 2011, which was codified in Ohio Revised Code Section 1509.70 et. seq., defining “State Universities”, for the purposes of such law as state agencies, and
WHEREAS, Ohio Revised Code Section 1509.71 creates an Oil and Gas Leasing Commission which is mandated to adopt rules which will govern the negotiation and approval of leases for shale oil upon lands owned by the State and held by State Agencies, including Ohio University; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1509.73 (A) (1), prior to the adoption of the rules by the Commission, the University may lease its property “in consultation with the Oil and Gas Leasing Commission”; and
WHEREAS, officials of Ohio University have been approached and are in contact with oil and gas companies interested in entering into negotiations for oil and gas leases; and
WHEREAS, Ohio University has completed a preliminary assessment of the implications of horizontal high-pressure hydraulic fracturing to extract oil and gas on University owned land, and has developed a set of recommendations for campus-based decisions within an overall University based decision-making process; and
WHEREAS, The Ohio University Board of Trustees has been duly advised with respect to the legal, business and economic impact of such transactions with consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of such transactions, and reviewed lease agreements with environmental and ecological protections provisions;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees does hereby authorize the President or his designee to proceed with the further negotiation and execution of oil and gas leases for shale oil on appropriate Ohio University lands, subject to legal review, compliance with Ohio Revised Code Sections 1509.70 et. seq. and upon his or his designee’s determination that the leases are in the best interests of the University.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ohio University Board of Trustees hereby authorizes the President or his designee to continue the investigation, inventory and evaluation of the parcels of land under the jurisdiction of each of the five regional campuses and the main Athens Campus as is required by and in compliance with the requirements of Ohio Revised Code Sections 1509.70 et. seq.
APPROVAL OF PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO DEVELOP CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS FOR JEFFERSON HALL ROOF REPAIR/REPLACEMENT, HOUSING PARKING GARAGE CEILING REPLACEMENT, SCRIPPS COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION PHASE I, AND COMPOST FACILITY EXPANSION
RESOLUTION 2012-
WHEREAS, four capital projects have been planned, developed and funded as follows:
Jefferson Hall Roof Repair/Replacement with a total project budget of $3.0 million to be funded from the Residential Housing Auxiliary reserve,
Housing Parking Garage Ceiling Replacement with a total project budget of $570,000 to be funded from the Residential Housing Auxiliary reserve,
Scripps College of Communication Project, Phase 1, with a total revised project budget of $22.5 million with the following revised fund sources: o $2.4 million from FY2007 – FY2008 House Bill 496, o $2.5 million in both received and anticipated gifts, o $17.6 million from the University’s Series 2012 debt issuance, and
Compost Facility Expansion, with a total revised project budget of $1,670,000 with the following revised fund sources: o $1,090,000 from an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant o $580,000 in state appropriations.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ohio University Board of Trustees authorizes the receipt of bids and the President or his designee to accept and award construction contracts within the total project budgets identified.
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration, CFO and Treasurer
Re: CONSTRUCTION PROJECT APPROVAL REQUEST: Jefferson Hall Roof Repair/Replacement Housing Parking Garage Ceiling Replacement Scripps College of Communication Phase 1, Budget Revision Compost Facility Expansion, Budget Revision
The following construction projects in excess of $500,000 in total project cost are presented to the Board for construction project approval or budget revision approval. A resolution is provided that addresses these projects.
Jefferson Hall Roof Repair/Replacement: The rehabilitation of Jefferson Hall, the largest residence hall on East Green, will be a key focus of the Housing Development Plan on East Green. In anticipation of that comprehensive rehabilitation of this 140,000 gross square foot building, this project will replace the clay tile roof and adjacent features and detailing. The roof consists of approximately 34,000 square feet of clay tile. Although this is replacement of all waterproofing underlayment structure, it is anticipated 97% of the existing clay tile will be reused in the replacement process. Water absorption and breakage tests have been performed on the tile. All of the existing tile will be removed stored and inspected, and all of the felt underlayment will be replaced. New tile to match existing will be mixed with the tile to be reused, and all of the tile will be reinstalled with new mounting strips. All copper built-in gutters, downspouts, valleys, counter flashings and chimney caps will be replaced with new copper. The cupola and dormer windows will be repainted. The project budget is $3.0 million, which will be fully funded from the Residential Housing Auxiliary Reserve.
South Green Front Four Parking Garage Ceiling Replacement: Pickering, Brown, Mackinnon and Crawford Halls were constructed in 1966 and 1967. These residence halls are known as the South Green “Front Four.” The “Front Four” are to remain as an integral part of South Green in the Housing Master Plan. Each of these buildings has parking garages that serve the students living above, but also function to raise the building above the flood plain. This project will replace the existing garage ceiling under Crawford, McKinnon, and the adjacent patio areas. The garage ceilings under Pickering and Brown Halls have been replaced previously. Ceiling tiles and pipe insulation containing asbestos fibers will be removed. The sprinkler system for fire protection is old and leaky and will be replaced. Old leaky storm drain lines will be replaced as well. New ceiling grid, lay-in tiles, and upgraded lighting will be installed. The project budget is $570,000, and will be fully funded from the Residential Housing Auxiliary Reserve. . Scripps College of Communication Phase 1, Budget Revision: Page 2 of 3
The Board of Trustees first approved this project in October of 2009 when a major portion of the project was planned to be funded with state appropriations. In November of 2011, the Board of Trustees approved a budget increase to $19.0 million with a major portion of the project to be funded with the University’s Series 2012 debt issuance instead of the previously planned state appropriations. Since that time bids were received significantly over budget. The project was revisited in terms of scope and need and revised and rebid. Some items that were determined not to be inherently necessary to the mission of the renovation or the functioning and useful life of the building were deleted from the scope prior to rebid. Although the results of the rebid were less than the original bid, it is determined that a budget increase to $22.5 million is necessary in order to deliver the project in a manner that is in the best interests of the University. The increase is chiefly due to inflationary factors for both material and labor and the complexity of the confined site.
At the April 2012 Board meeting the University will be requesting an increase in the project budget to $22.5 million with the following revised fund sources: $2.4 million from FY2007 – FY2008 House Bill 496, $2.5 million in both received and anticipated gifts, and $17.6 million from the University’s Series 2012 debt issuance. Debt service will be funded from reallocated general fund base budget. The increase in the project budget is proposed to be fully borne by the increase in funding from the University’s Series 2012 debt issuance. This represents a $3.5 million increase in University debt for the project. A level of flexibility was included in the bond issue that can handle this increase.
Consolidation of the Scripps College of Communication into the former Baker Center at College and Union Streets has been identified as a high priority project in the long range facility master plan since 2005. A goal of the project is to house all of the departmental offices of the college into this one building along with the majority of the college’s conference areas, laboratories, and specialized classrooms. The existing building is approximately 90,000 gross square feet. The final renovations call for a design that yields 99,000 gross square feet from total renovation and new construction. In order to make progress toward the goal while continuing to identify funding, the project was organized into two phases. The first phase is now presented for the Board’s approval with a total proposed project budget of $22.5 million. The first phase provides a completed building envelope, internal building circulation system and lobby, completed building systems, and complete build out of approximately one half of the building for final occupancy. The functions planned to occupy the building in this first phase include the Deans Office, School of Journalism, and School of Media Arts.
Compost Facility Expansion, Budget Revision Ohio University implemented an in-vessel composting system in February of 2009 which converts kitchen waste into useable compost and thus diverts waste from the landfill. The majority of the original Compost Facility was funded through two Ohio Department of Natural Resources grants. Again facilitated by grant funding, this project will expand the system and more than triple its capacity. The project will add a 31.9 kW roof and ground mounted solar array which will supplement the 10.01 kW solar array that was installed with the original facility. The two arrays together are projected to produce enough electricity to supply 100% of the needs of the entire in-vessel composting facility when the expansion is complete
In April of 2011, the Board of Trustees approved this project at a total project budget of $1,345,000 with $1,090,000 from an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Grant and $255,000 matching funds from state appropriations. The University also received a smaller American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Grant to develop a solar array on top of the Coal Storage Shed, which was not brought to the Board because the total project cost was anticipated to be less that the Board approval threshold.
Page 3 of 3
Once bids were received, the Compost Facility Expansion project was over budget, but the Coal Shed Solar Array project was significantly below budget. The primary reason for the increase in the Compost Facility Expansion is to accommodate Department of Health and Environmental Protection Agency requirements. The University is proposing to increase the budget for the Compost Facility Expansion project with state appropriation funding which was originally intended as match for the Coal Shed Solar Array project, but is no longer needed for that purpose, as well as from residual state appropriated funds from projects that have been completed under budget.
The revised project budget for the Compost Facility Expansion project is now $1,670,000 with the following proposed fund sources: 1) the same American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant of $1,090,000, and 2) an increased amount of $580,000 in state appropriations.
A resolution is included to facilitate board approval for these four projects. Please let me know if you have questions.
Construction Projects Approval Consent Agenda
Tab
Construction Projects Agenda
Jefferson Hall Roof Repair/Replacement Housing Parking Garage Ceiling Replacement – ‘Front Four’ Scripps College of Communication – Phase I, Budget Revision Compost Facility Expansion – Budget Revision Construction Projects Jefferson Hall Roof Repair/Replacement
Jefferson Hall will be a key focus of the Housing Development Plan on East Green This project will replace 34,000 sq. ft. of clay tile roof system re-using an anticipated 97% of existing clay tile in the process The full Rehabilitation Project of Jefferson Hall will follow as a major project in the Housing Development Plan Budget: $3 million Fund source: Residential Housing Auxiliary Reserve
Construction Projects Housing Parking Garage Ceiling Replacement
Pickering, Brown, MacKinnon and Crawford residence halls, the “Front Four”, are an integral part of the South Green in the Housing Master Plan This project will replace ceiling grid, lay-in tiles, lighting, sprinkler piping, and storm drains under Crawford and McKinnon Halls; Pickering and Brown garage ceilings were replaced previously Budget: $570,000 Fund source: Residential Housing Auxiliary Reserve Construction Projects Scripps College of Communication Phase I Budget Revision
Prior approval by the Board of Trustees in November 2011 for $19 million budget Initial bids were significantly over budget -> Phase I project scope and need was revisited, revised, and rebid Recommend adding $3.5 million to budget to achieve best value – addition to come from Series 2012 Debt Issuance Second Phase is anticipated in FY2014 Revised Budget: $ 22.5 million Revised Fund Sources: $ 2.4 million from FY2007-FY2008 House Bill 496 $ 2.5 million in received and anticipated gifts $ 17.6 million from the University’s proposed Series 2012 debt issuance
Construction Projects Compost Facility Expansion Budget Revision In-vessel composting system implemented in February 2009 with ODNR grants This project expansion will triple capacity Existing solar array capacity will also triple April 2011 Budget: $ 1,345,000 Revised Budget: $ 1,670,000 Revised Fund Sources:
$ 1,090,000 American Recovery & Reinvestment Act $ 580,000 in state appropriations from combined projects and reappropriations . ESTABLISHMENT OF UNIVERSITY QUASI-ENDOWMENTS STRATEGIC RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT and HUMANITIES RESEARCH FUND RESOLUTION 2012 --
WHEREAS, The Board of Trustees of Ohio University is responsible for oversight of the financial condition of the institution, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has the ability to establish quasi-endowments, or funds functioning as endowments, to be utilized at the discretion of the University, and
WHEREAS, The Ohio University Foundation Board of Trustees and, specifically, the Investment Sub-Committee is entrusted by The Board of Trustees of Ohio University with the oversight to invest funds established as University quasi-endowments, and
WHEREAS, University quasi-endowments are invested alongside endowments of the University and The Ohio University Foundation and managed in accordance with The Ohio University Foundation’s investment policy and spending policy, and
WHEREAS, the following two quasi-endowments are requested to be established:
Strategic Research Enhancement Quasi-Endowment – requested by the Vice President for Research and Creative Activity and Dean of the Graduate College; funding from the quasi-endowment, with an initial corpus of $10.9 million, will support the University’s Technology Transfer Office in its pursuit to encourage research and development that will result in future royalty streams for the institution, and
Humanities Research Fund Quasi-Endowment – requested by the Interim Dean of Arts and Sciences; funding from the quasi-endowment, with an initial corpus of $1.0 million, will support research in the field of humanities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University hereby approves the establishment of the above listed funds.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Treasurer of Ohio University, be and hereby is, directed and authorized to administer policies and procedures to manage this quasi- endowment.
Interoffice Communication
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Stephen T. Golding, Vice President for Finance and Administration and Treasurer
Re: Establishment of University Quasi-Endowments
Included on the Resources Committee Agenda for the April 2012 Board of Trustees meeting is a request to establish two University quasi-endowments. As you know, quasi-endowments are financial instruments to be established by a governing board and intended to function like an endowment, including the investment of funds within a typical endowment asset allocation. The University accomplishes this by providing oversight of quasi-endowment funds, like endowment funds, to The Ohio University Foundation’s Board of Trustees and, more specifically, it’s Investment Sub-Committee. The goal of the University’s use of quasi-endowments is to further the institution’s strategic priorities.
At this time, the University is recommending the establishment of the following quasi-endowments:
Strategic Research Enhancement Quasi-Endowment – requested by the Vice President for Research and Creative Activity and Dean of the Graduate College; funding from the quasi- endowment, with an initial corpus of $10.9 million, will support the University’s Technology Transfer Office in its pursuit to encourage research and development that will result in future royalty streams for the institution
Humanities Research Fund Quasi-Endowment - requested by the Interim Dean of Arts and Sciences; funding from the quasi-endowment, with an initial corpus of $1.0 million, will support research in the field of Humanities
Both quasi-endowments have been established with funding attributable to the royalty stream resulting from the marketing of University intellectual property. The University’s only other existing quasi-endowment, the Edison Biotechnology Institute Research Quasi-Endowment, was established with funds from this same source.
Annual appropriations from the quasi-endowments will be limited to an amount calculated in accordance with the Ohio University Foundation’s spending policy for endowments. Corpus amounts contributed to the quasi-endowments will be restricted from removal for a period of 36 months unless approved by the President. The use of quasi-endowments will continue to be monitored by the Vice President for Finance and Administration.
If you have questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 740-593-2556.
AGENDA University Academics Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Governance Room 104 2:00 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
16. Academic Quality: College of Education - Program Accreditation/Learning Outcomes 17. Academic Quality: Program Review Revision Update 18. Academic Quality: Dashboard Review 19. Office of Information Technology Update 20. Quarters to Semesters Progress Report 21. Search Updates 22. Consent Agenda, Emeritus/Emerita Recommendations 23. Consent Agenda, Faculty Fellowship Awards 24. Consent Agenda, Renaming of Diabetes Endocrine Center to Diabetes Institute 25. Consent Agenda, Creation of Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine 26. Consent Agenda, School of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness Diabetes Certificate 27. Consent Agenda, Naming of Space, Café in the Academic Research Center
First‐Year Retention Six‐Year Graduation Rates Degrees Granted ACT Composite Student‐Faculty Interaction Enrolled in 2004 2010‐11 83.0% 63% 742 23.0 2011 Quality Rating of Their Relationship with Percent of new freshman who return for a second year Percentage of new freshman graduating at Ohio Number of undergraduate degrees awarded Mean ACT score for new freshman Faculty Members University within six years Freshmen Seniors Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance PCOE 5.23 5.15 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 82.0% 83.0% 87.0% 83.0% 73% 69% 74% 63% 681 709 579 669 22.5 22.7 22.7 23.1 23.0
Student‐Faculty Ratio Group I Faculty Annual Weighted Student Credit Hours Grants and Contracts Student Travel 24:1 78% 2011‐12 144K 2009‐10 $2.35 Million 35 / $12.5K 2010‐11
Undergraduate and graduate FTE to FTE Faculty Percentage of full‐time tenured and tenure‐track faculty Annual Weighted Student Credits Hours Taught Amount of sponsored funding received in the form of Number and Amount of travel grants awarded to as a percentage of full time faculty grants and contracts Past Performance Students 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance (in $ millions) Past Performance 17:1 20:1 22:1 23:1 24:1 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 91% 90% 75% 72% 80% 120K 113K 117K 144K $2.1 $2.2 $2.1 $2.3 $2.3 # Awarded 20 25 33 41 Amount $5.1K $5.8K $9K $12.6K
Clinical Expenses Undergraduate Headcount Graduate Headcount Student Diversity Gifts (Pledges) $694 2010‐11 1,852 2011‐12 1,156 2011‐12 11.9% $36.8 Million Amount of clinical expenses in Teacher Education Main campus headcount enrollment, fall term, including Main campus headcount enrollment, fall term, including Percent Enrolled that are Non‐white (undergraduate Total Amount of cash and pledges received within the last (thousands) on‐line on‐line and graduate) five years
Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance Past Performance (Cash Receipts) 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 $641 $567 $605 $533 $694 2,230 2,047 1,882 1,871 1,885 691 709 773 902 802 7.2% 9.8% 10.5% 10.1% 11.9% $219K $287K $670K $35M $509K
Dashboard Key: Connections to 4x4 Strategic Plan
Four Fundamentals Enrollment Capital Campaign
DRAFT DASHBOARD, SEPTEMBER 2, 2011 University Board of Trustees Presentation on Academic Quality and Accountability Academics Committee April 19, 2012 • 1:00 p.m. Walter Hall The Patton College Dashboard First-Year Retention
Percent of new freshmen 83% who return for a second year 2009-10
Past Performance
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 PCOE 82% 83% 87% 83% Six-Year Graduation Rate
Percent of new freshmen graduating 63% from PCOE within six years of new freshmen enrolled in fall 2004
Past Performance. Year represents when new freshmen enrolled 2001 2002 2003 2004 PCOE 73% 69% 74% 63% Degrees Granted
Number of degrees awarded 742 (Undergraduate and Graduate) 2010-2011
Past Performance. (Represents percentage of PCOE degrees compared to University) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 PCOE 681 (12%) 709 (12%) 579 (10%) 669 (11%) ACT Composite
23 Mean ACT score for new freshmen 2010
Past Performance (Fall of each year) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 PCOE 22.5 22.7 22.7 23.1 23 Student-Faculty Interaction Rating 2011 Quality Rating of Their Relationship with Faculty Members
Freshmen Seniors
PCOE 5.23 5.15
Rating of Relationship with Faculty is: 1 = unhelpful, inconsiderate, rigid to 7 = helpful, considerate, flexible. Student–Faculty Ratio
Undergraduate and Graduate FTE 24:1 to FTE Faculty 2010-11
Past Performance 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 PCOE 17:1 20:1 22:1 23:1 Group I Faculty
Full-time tenure-track (47) faculty as a percentage 78% of full-time faculty 2011-12
Past Performance (Actual number) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 PCOE 91% (43) 90% (36) 75% (30) 72% (33) 80% (52) Grants & Contracts
Amount of sponsored funding received in the $2.35M form of grants and contracts 2010-11
Past Performance (PCOE Grants & Contracts as percentage of University) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 PCOE $2.1M $2.2M $2.1M $2.3M $2.3M (6%) (6%) (6%) (7%) (6%) Annual Weighted Student Credit Hours Taught
New WSCH taxonomy 144K began in 2009-10 2009-10
Past Performance (PCOE WSCH as percent of University) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 PCOE 120K (5%) 113K (5%) 117K (5%) 144K (7%) Student Travel
Number and amount of travel grants 35 / $12.5K awarded to students 2010-11
Past Performance 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 # Awarded 20 25 33 41 Amount $5.1K $5.8K $9K $12.6K Clinical Expenses
Amount of Clinical Expenses $694K in Teacher Education 2010-11
Past Performance 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 PCOE $641K $567K $605K $533K $694K Research & Creative Activities Expo
Students from The Patton College 24 = of Education Presenting in 2012
Number of 1st place Blue Ribbons won 4 = by Patton College students in 2011
Number of Students Participating 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 PCOE 36 19 17 24 Illustrative Student Publications 2007-2012
Alquraini, T. & Gut, D. (2012). Critical children learning mathematics through Johnson, J., Shope, S., & Roush, J. components of successful inclusion of beat, rhythm, and melody. Young (2009). Toward a responsive model for students with severe disabilities: Children, 67(1), 74-89. educational leadership in rural Literature review. International Journal Appalachia: Merging theory and of Special Education, 27(1), 42-59. Godwyll, F. E., & Ngumbi, E. (2012 practice. Education Leadership Review, ).1400 to 1900: Women. In O. 10(2), 3-10. Boyd, C. (2010). Relapse prevention Patterson, & J. G. Geoffrey, (Eds.). and sex offenders. The Rehabilitation Cultural sociology of the Middle East, Kanyongo, G.Y., Brooks, G.P., Professional, 18(1), 3-10. Asia, and Africa (Vol. 2). Thousand Blankson, L.K., & Gocmen, G. (2007). Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Reliability and statistical power: How Doppen, F.H., & Tesar, J. (2008). Social measurement fallibility affects power studies preservice teachers’ first order Howley, A., Howley, C., Burgess, L., & and required sample sizes for several documents. Social Studies Research Pusateri, D. (2008). Social class, Amish parametric and nonparametric statistics. and Practice, 3(2), 1-10. culture, and an Egalitarian ethos: Case Journal of Modern Applied Statistical study from a rural school serving Amish Methods, 6(1), 81-90. Er, S.N. (in press). Homeschooling children. Journal of Research in Rural meets virtual schools: Students and Education, 23(3), 1-12. Kuo, C., Song, H., Smith, R. & Franklin, parent perceptions of online T. (2007). A comparative study of the mathematics classes. In H. Yang & S. Howley, A., Showalter, D., Howley, effectiveness of an online and face-to- Wang (Eds.), Cases on formal and M.D., Howley, C.B., Klein, R., & face technology applications course in informal elearning environments: Johnson, J. (2011). Challenges for teacher education. International Journal Opportunities and practices. Hershey, place-based mathematics pedagogy in of Technology for Teaching and PA: IGI Global. rural schools and communities in the Learning, 3(2), 85-94. United States. Children, Youth and Geist, K., Geist, E.A., & Kuznik, K. Environments, 21(1), 101–127. (2012). The patterns of music: Young Illustrative Student Publications 2007-2012
Mather, P.C., Karbley, M., & Nirode, W. (2011). Thinking deeply Ziff, K., Beamish, P.M., & Thomas, D. Yamamoto, M. (2012). Identity matters about area and perimeter. Mathematics (2008). The asylum and community: in a short-term, international service- Teacher,105, 304-310. The Athens Lunatic Asylum in learning program. Journal of College & Palmero, M., Li, M, Lawrence, H. J. & nineteenth-century Ohio. Journal of the Character, 13 (1). doi:10.1515/jcc- Conley, V. M. (2011). Who is in History of Psychiatry, 19, 409-432. 2012-1835. charge? An analysis of NCAA Division I Arena Management Models. Journal of Middleton, R.A., Robinson, M.C., & Venue and Event Management, 3(2), Mu'min, A.S. (2010). Rehabilitation 17-32. Retrieved from counseling: A continuing professional http://www.hrsm.sc.edu/JVEM//vol3issu imperative for multiculturalism and e2.shtml. advocacy competence. In M.J. Ratts, R.L. Toporek, & J.A. Lewis (Eds.), ACA Robinson, M., Lewis, D., Henderson, advocacy competencies: A social D., & Flowers, C. (2009). Increasing justice framework for counselors. enrollment of minority students. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Rehabilitation Education Journal 23(3), Association. 183-192. Miyafusa, S. & Godwyll, F. E. (2009). The saga of border crossers: Social Zelkowski, J.S. (2009). Tackling low- adjustment of Japanese female level cognitive task teaching in students in a Midwestern U.S. secondary mathematics: One approach University. The International Journal of to mold pre-service teachers’ pre- Organisations, Communities, & conceived beliefs into best practice. Nations, 9(4) 157-170. Journal of Inquiry and Action in Education, 3(1), 70–94. Undergraduate Headcount
Main campus headcount enrollment, fall term, 1,852 including on-line 2011-12
Past Performance (PCOE Undergrad headcount as percent of University) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 PCOE 2,230 2,047 1,882 1,871 1,885 1,852 (13%) (12%) (11%) (11%) (11%) (11%) Graduate Headcount
Main campus headcount enrollment, fall term, 1,156 including on-line 2011-12
Past Performance (PCOE graduate headcount as percent of University) 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 PCOE 691 709 773 902 802 1,156 (19%) (19%) (20%) (22%) (20%) (28%) Student Diversity
Percent enrolled 11.9% that are non-white
Past Performance 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 PCOE 7.2% 9.8% 10.5% 10.1% 11.9%
Enrollment figures were obtained by major codes (each year includes all programs) Gifts (Pledges)
Total amount of cash and $36.8M pledges received last 5 years
Yearly Breakdown 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 PCOE $219K $287K $670K $35M $509K 2013 US NEWS & World Report Rankings Comparison Ohio Public Colleges of Education
Means GRE Scores Funded Research Total Graduate (Verbal/Quantitativ Doctoral Funded Per Faculty Education US News Rank e) Acceptance Rate Research Member Enrollment
Ohio State 18 549/644 34.7% $30.9m $192.8k 1,198
Cincinnati 58 497/584 31.2% $15.5m $164.5k 643
Miami (OH) 73 575/636 46.4% $1.6m $17.8k 692
PCOE 92 510/601 53.4% $2.7m $50.5k 929
Bowling Green 120 NA/NA 34.2% $16.1m $1.4k 201
Kent St. 124 471/533 34.3% $43.7m $5.1k 1,033
Akron 139 NA/NA 32.6% $71.0m $4.2k 488
Dayton 157 NA/NA 29.4% $17.2m $0.8k 695
Toledo 167 429/500 63.9% $36.5m $1.9k 324
Cleveland St. 174 467/474 65.0% $26.5m $1.9k 2,565
Youngstown Unranked NA/NA NA NA NA NA 2013 Aspirational Peers Comparison
Means GRE Funded Total Scores Doctoral Research Per Graduate US News (Verbal/Quantit Acceptance Funded Faculty Education Tier Rank ative) Rate Research Member Enrollment Comparison PCOE 92 510/601 53.4% $2.7m $50.5k 929 ––
UNC- Chapel Hill 34 526/602 39.5% $7.5m $196.7k 543 TOP
Purdue Univ. 37 521/659 41.1% $10.2m $141.4k 452 TOP
Univ. of Tennesse 49 531/582 41.4% $12.7m $121.9k 564 TOP e
Univ. of Mass. 51 513/613 42.0% $6.6m $129.7k 708 MIDDLE
Univ. Of Miami (FL) 53 544/664 20.1% $7.2m $218.3k 277 MIDDLE
UNC- Greensboro 58 521/539 45.5% $12.0m $171.1k 1,049 MIDDLE
Univ. of Kentucky 61 533/610 34.8% $11.8m $131.4k 775 LOWER
So. Illinois Univ. - 67 521/505 58.0% $24.2m $232.9k 1,232 LOWER Carbondale Auburn Univ. 77 456/503 41.6% $6.9m $84.8k 881 LOWER Accreditation
Please see the excerpt from the full BOE Report in your materials Unit Accreditation
1. Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions 2. Assessment System and Unit Evaluation 3. Field Experiences and Clinical Practice 4. Diversity 5. Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development 6. Unit Governance and Resources
Unit Accreditation
Specialized Professional Association (SPA) Special Education-Early Childhood
When the Assessment Name of Assessment Form of Assessment is administered
Praxis II Content Test Required Licensure Exam Required for Licensure
Review of materials to be sure Pre-Professional Internship candidate is ready to enter Prior to Professional Internship Review professional internship
Unit Plan Lesson Plan EDSP 577
Completed by university Professional Internship Final supervisor and cooperating End of professional internship Evaluation teacher
Teacher Work Sample Capstone project During professional internship
Individualized IEP EDSP 581 Education Plan (IEP)
Field Observation Evaluation Data Form EDSP 682 Practicum
Functional Behavior Behavioral Intervention Plan EDSP 671 Assessment
Thank You Excerpts from National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education Board of Examiners Report, 10/10/2009-10/14/2009 Material excerpted: pp. 3-5, 6, 11-13
II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK. The conceptual framework establishes the shared vision for a unit’s efforts in preparing educators to work effectively in P–12 schools. It provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, scholarship, service, and unit accountability. The conceptual framework is knowledge based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with the unit and institutional mission, and continuously evaluated.
1. Provide a brief overview of the unit's conceptual framework and how it is integrated across the unit. The shared vision of the unit for preparing education professionals, aligned to the mission and vision of OU, is encompassed in the phrase “we prepare leader-educators and practitioners who share our commitment to serve society responsibly as change agents in meeting diverse human and social needs and engage in lifelong learning.” The phrase introduces the conceptual framework in publications and signage, and is evident in the four domains of knowledge that constitute the conceptual core: (1) leader-educators and practitioners, (2) change agents, (3) diversity, and (4) life-long learning. The conceptual core supports the vision of OU, in recognizing the candidates' engagement in scholarship, leadership, and international education; for its extensive network of partnerships; for its diverse and inclusive campus; and for its commitment to addressing society's educational, economic, and cultural challenges.
In terms of Leader-Educators and Practitioners, the unit prepares expert, ethical, and reflective leader-educators and practitioners and decision-makers who are committed to holistic learning and engaged in collaborative and professional service to society. In terms of Change Agents, the unit prepares leader-educators and practitioners who address the changing human and social needs through inquiry, research, assessment, critical thinking, problem-solving, and proactive use of technologies. For Diversity, the unit prepares leader-educators and practitioners who appreciate the variety of human cultural expression, employ multiple approaches to inquiry, use knowledge and practice for the benefit of a diverse society, and promote social equity and justice for effective civic engagement. The focus on Lifelong Learning ensures the unit prepares leader-educators and practitioners who engage in self-reflection and professional development for continuous personal growth and who inspire such practices in those whom they serve. Brochures, posters, and a Unit of Education Conceptual Core handbook confirm these elements of the conceptual framework.
An extensive knowledge base of classic and current literature for each domain undergirds the conceptual framework. For each domain, a table further identifies the theoretical foundations, empirical foundations, and illustrative readings lists from syllabi.
Leader-educators and practitioners are defined in terms of responsibility, expertise, power-sharing, sense-making, and leadership as cultural change. In terms of change
1 agents, the knowledge base illustrates the effects of information technology, a face-paced world, 21st century skills, demographic changes, and yet a firm foundation in a pluralistic view of truth, and an emphasis on inquiry, research, critical thinking, problem solving, assessment, and the proactive use of technology.
Diversity is characterized as a variety of differences that characterize students, candidates, faculty, and staff, including race, ethnicity, culture, religion, gender, sexual orientation, social class, disability or exceptionality, and geographic location. Included also are differences in learning styles and the multiplicity of relevant viewpoints and instructional approaches as subtleties. The knowledge related to diversity includes developing candidates' cultural consciousness using terms such as culturally appropriate, culturally responsive, culturally relevant, culturally competent, and social justice. Both coursework and clinical experiences in diverse settings are seen as essential in the candidate’s development of critical consciousness. A clear focus on differentiated instruction allows candidates the skills to work with the diverse students in schools.
The knowledge base related to lifelong learning traces learning through its natural occurrence in children when they are in rich environments and given adequate encouragement, through the understanding that learning does not end when individuals become adults but continues throughout the lifespan, recognizing that there is a need for different instructional approaches for adult learners. Using the constructivist approach, the unit’s conceptual framework is attentive to (1) learning has a biological basis, (2) learners use their prior experiences as a basis for constructing new knowledge, (3) learning is a social activity, and (4) knowledge has a cultural basis.
The knowledge base also includes areas that address the wisdom of practice and educational policies of the unit including approaches to teaching and assessment (authentic learning, scaffolding, conceptual change, and metacognition). The unit truly cultivates the habits of mind that lead to graduates' lifelong engagement with expanding domains of knowledge in their teaching fields as well as the field of pedagogy, recognizing that education professionals learn a great deal from practicing their craft in a thoughtful manner. This requires reflection and inquiry and ongoing interaction with colleagues to define, monitor, and refine effective practice, leading individuals from novice to the expert stage of professional performance.
A set of 18 proficiencies for education candidates emanates from four principles of the conceptual core. In addition, four core values described by 14 discrete indicators further guide the work of the unit. Dispositions are assessed at entrance, midpoint, and completion of all programs. Evidence of the 18 proficiencies of the conceptual core, and the connections of the four principles with the 18 proficiencies, appear in the work of the unit. This evidence is in the form of handbooks, flyers, brochures, web pages, and syllabi. It is known by the faculty, staff, candidates, and school partners, and is a connecting force in the assessment system. The conceptual core and its proficiencies, and the core values (dispositions) allow the alignment of the content of the programs, and the charges of the institution to the unit.
2 The Unit for the Preparation of Education Professionals (UPEP) along with the Assessment Council (AC), a subcommittee of UPEP, drive the Unit Assessment System (UAS). Data are collected on the six to eight assessments identified by all programs which are first connected to the standards of the profession, and then aligned to the candidate proficiencies. Course syllabi also include the appropriate standards as a means to help candidates see how standards are a central focus of the coursework.
The six to eight key assessments developed for program review aim to demonstrate that programs meet the standards of the SPAs. All SPA assessments are aligned to the unit’s conceptual core and candidate proficiencies, which in turn are aligned to state and professional standards. All programs at the initial level have received either national recognition or national recognition with conditions by their respective SPAs, which requires that program assessments be aligned to the standards. Further, all assessments conducted across the unit are aligned to the candidate proficiencies. A standards alignment chart outlines how programs meet the proficiencies and standards to which they are held accountable. The chart includes alignment to Ohio Teacher Standards, INTASC, NCATE, Praxis II, Praxis III, NBPTS, Value Added, the OU Conceptual Framework, and the standards of each of the SPAs. Course syllabi also include the appropriate standards as a means to help candidates see how standards are a central focus of the in coursework. LiveText supports the collection and reporting of the data, additionally housing program reports, agendas and minutes of meetings, rubrics, and samples of candidate work.
The assessment cycle clearly outlines the process of review, analysis, evaluation, reporting, and change. Following the quarter in which an assessment is given, the director of assessment and academic improvement forwards the data to the subcommittees of the assessment council. The subcommittee consults with the appropriate faculty, programs, or departments in their review of the data with a focus on formulating recommended action steps. These steps are forwarded to AC for review and then to UPEP for readings and requests for further information. When there is an approved plan of action, communication goes to the faculty, programs, and departments who report back to UPEP with results of implementation. Additionally, official communication by the unit head goes to the UPEP constituent groups, including K-12 partners, regional campuses, faculty, administration, and candidates.
The conceptual framework is the shared vision for the unit's efforts in preparing candidates to work effectively in P-12 schools, providing direction for programs, faculty, and candidates, focused specific on unit accountability. The conceptual framework is knowledge based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with the unit and institutional mission, and continuously evaluated.
III. STANDARDS In its responses to each standard, the team should indicate when differences exist among the main campus, distance learning programs, and off-campus programs.
3 Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school professionals know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards. . . .
1d. Student Learning for Teacher Candidates Student Learning for Teacher Candidates – Initial Teacher Preparation: Acceptable Student Learning for Teacher Candidates – Advanced Teacher Preparation: Acceptable
Summary of Findings for Initial Teacher Preparation: The faculty at OU have established key unit assessments throughout all programs. The teacher work sample (TWS) methodology and lesson planning are two of the eight key assessments. The TWS provides an array of artifacts that document candidate’s knowledge and skills in modifying instruction to meet the needs of all students. The OU LiveText website relates that the current TWS has five sections:
1. Contextual Factors: The teacher candidate uses information about the learning- teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment. 2. Learning Goals: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied, and appropriate learning goals. 3. Assessment Plan/ Design for Instruction: The teacher uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess student learning before, during, and after instruction. Based on the assessment data, the teacher designs appropriate instruction. 4. Instructional Decision-Making and Analysis of Student Learning: The teacher uses ongoing analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions as well as uses assessment data to profile student learning. 5. Reflection and Self-Evaluation: The teacher reflects on his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.
Data from 2008-2009 reflect that a significant percentage of initial candidates (n= 468) either “met” the indicator or “exceeded” the five TWS indicators. Through the data management system, LiveText, faculty can disaggregate the data to the candidate level and analyze the data at both the program and unit level.
OU has adopted lesson planning as a key unit assessment. The seven categories within the rubric that are used to assess candidates’ lesson plans are: (1) describing students and linking the lesson to them, (2) specifying lesson objectives, (3) relating lesson to curriculum standards and guidelines, (4) listing content to be taught, (5) listing resources/materials, (6) outlining the instructional sequence, and (7) providing an evaluation plan. According to a recent OU report on lesson planning, in 2007-2008 data,
4 between 75 percent and 93 percent of candidates met expectations in all categories. For 2008-2009, between 64 percent and 92 percent met expectations.
In addition, currently all new teachers must complete the Praxis III in the first year of teaching. The Praxis III has four categories of performances that are observed and scored by trained Praxis III evaluators. The four categories are
1. Organizing content knowledge for student learning 2. Creating an environment for student learning 3. Teaching for student learning 4. Teacher professionalism.
Four years of data reflect that OU candidates maintained an almost 100 percent pass rate on the Praxis III and confirm that OU candidates have the skills and knowledge necessary to teach all students. Finally, interviews with seniors completing the OU teacher preparation program confirmed that they believe they are well prepared and confident that they can teach all students.
Summary of Findings for Advanced Teacher Preparation: The “Leadership for Teachers Preparation Program Clinical Manual” for the GEA (teacher leader) program stipulates that “Ohio University's Leadership for Teachers program is designed to produce advanced-level teachers who are experienced and ready to serve effectively as leaders in their schools and communities. The program emphasizes field-based experiences within the context of a seminar framework. The major goals of the program are as follows:
• To identify and nurture teachers who wish to prepare for the opportunity, should it become available, to provide leadership for their schools and communities; • To prepare teachers to apply theoretical ideas and research findings to the practice of school leadership; and • To promote school and classroom leadership that responds to the interests of students and communities, sustains local educational initiatives, honors diversity, and actively promotes social justice.”
As noted above, each GEA (teacher leader) candidate will complete a final action research project that utilizes the candidate’s understanding of the school, family, and community contexts and the analysis of salient research to construct meaningful learning opportunities for all students. A review of course syllabi (EDAD 602, 603, 611, 671, and 691) reveals that advanced candidates will be expected to be proficient in their knowledge and skills in analyzing student performance data and how to utilize school, family, and community resources that will support student learning.
1e. Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals: Acceptable
Summary of Findings for the Preparation of Other School Professionals: OU offers the following programs and endorsements for other school professionals:
5 1. Educational Administration – Principal 2. Educational Administration – Superintendent 3. Technology Facilitator 4. Reading Education 5. School Counselor
All five of the above programs are nationally recognized. The school counselor program is accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP).
The two educational administration programs have not been reviewed under the new program review system, which requires data from key assessments. The IR relates that the programs are currently revising their assessment structure to align with the SPA six to eight assessment model and plan to begin the new assessment structure in fall of 2010. They continue to collect data on the four portfolios that formed the base of the assessments in the previous process.
Portfolio I for principals provides evidence of candidates’ ability to gather and analyze demographic, organizational, and academic performance data to better understand the current environment. Outcomes for the last three years reflect that 100 percent of the candidates are identified as “proficient” or “accomplished” in skills and knowledge that affect student learning, where “accomplished” is the highest rating on a four-point scale.
For the superintendent Portfolio I, all candidates (100%) in the superintendent program (2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009) scored in the “proficient” or “accomplished” ratings on items related to (1) the community, (2) the students, (3) the organizational structure, (4) the curriculum, instructional capacity, assessment system, (5) achievement trends, and (6) partnerships.
For Clinical Experience 1, 2, 3, and 4, all candidates in the superintendent program (2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009) scored “proficient” or “accomplished” ratings on items related to the district mission, high academic achievement of all students, organizational management, community engagement, ethical practice, and connection to wider context.
A review of pass rates on the Praxis II content tests for administration, reading, and school counselor reflects a 100 percent pass rate for the last three years. The graduate survey of candidate proficiencies and the employer survey results for education administration (while having a small number of respondents) do show that those completing the educational administration programs believe they were well prepared for their positions as school leaders.
6 Revising Academic Program Review
Progress Report April 2102 Why revise academic program review now?
• Perception that reviews are too much work, with few consequences • Broad shift from input-based assessment to output-based assessment • Evidence-based reviews incorporating appropriate data Working Group
Rob Brannan, Chair, Academic Program Review Committee Bruce Martin, Member, UCC Elizabeth Sayrs, Chair, UCC
David Descutner, Executive Vice Provost and Dean, University College Hugh Sherman, Dean, College of Business
Joni Wadley, Associate Director for Academic & Student Assessment Mike Williford, Associate Provost For Institutional Research And Assessment What is program review for?
• To provide a mechanism to track the continuous improvement of programs • To recognize and publicize those improvements • To provide a framework to assist programs with strategic planning
Elements to be revised
• Review process • Review content • Interaction with accreditation processes • Implementation Process Already addressed (2010): • Time limits to shorten overall process • Written reports of external and internal reviewers combined and written on campus Proposed: • Add EVPP to the process • Add follow-up before the next review Content: Self-study report
Current categories Proposed categories •General Summary of Department •General Summary of Department or School or School •Faculty Profile •Faculty profile •Undergraduate Program Review •Educational Quality (undergrad) •Graduate Program Review •Educational Quality (graduate) •Research, Scholarship and Creative •Research, Scholarship and Creative Activity (RSCA) Activity (RSCA) •Programmatic Practices •Service •Resources •Goals/Improvements before next •Other Distinctive Features or review Significant Accomplishments Current self-study report (undergraduate): Describe how the curriculum supports the majors offered by the Department, majors from other departments, and the general education curriculum of the university/college.
Proposed self-study report (undergraduate): • What are the learning outcomes of the program? • How is student achievement of learning outcomes measured? • How are the findings from these assessments being used to make improvements in the program related to student learning?
Interaction with program accreditation • Content • Scheduling • Accreditation reviews for individual programs occur every 2-10 years • Academic Program Review occurs every 7 years Implementation
• Phase in • Support for programs not currently using outcomes-based models
Next Steps
Feedback from: • UCC Academic Program Review committee • UCC • Chairs and directors • Deans
Tuition ACADEMIC QUALITY: Discounting Group I DASHBOARD REVIEW Faculty ACADEMIC QUALITY: THE DASHBOARD
Review of Completed Dashboard Indicators:
Graduation Rates Four Fundamentals Retention Four Fundamentals Degrees Granted Four Fundamentals ACT Composite Four Fundamentals Student-Faculty Interaction Four Fundamentals Student/Faculty Ratio Four Fundamentals Undergraduate Headcount Enrollment ACADEMIC QUALITY: THE DASHBOARD
Dashboard Indicators (April Board Meeting)
Topic 4X4 Strategic Plan
Tuition Discount Enrollment
Group I Faculty Four Fundamentals [Definition & Distribution] Group I Faculty Retention Total Compensation TUITION DISCOUNT HOW IS THE TUITION DISCOUNT RATE CALCULATED?
Total Institutional Grant Aid Total Discount Rate = Total Gross Tuition and Required Fee Revenue
http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/tuition-discounting.pdf TUITION DISCOUNT RATE*
Year Total Total Institutional Discount Rate for Discount Undergraduate Scholarship and Undergraduate Rates for 4 Gross Tuition and Grant Aid for Athens Students year public Required Fee Undergraduate institutions, Revenue** Students*** 2007-2008
2006-7 $240,990,636 $39,543,722 16.4% Median 2007-8 $257,254,813 $39,514,236 15.4% 15.6% 2008-9 $262,264,797 $46,280,584 17.6% Mean 17.6% 2009-10 $277,533,921 $47,959,272 17.3% 2010-11 $303,352,545 $57,466,229 18.9%
* Ohio University Consolidated Statement of Activities ** Per Budget Office and includes all tuition and fees and scholarship *** Per Student Financial Aid Office OUT-OF-POCKET COSTS
$10,000
$9,000 Average Financial Aid $8,000 Package* for students with need= $8,247 $7,000 * Includes Federal Grants, State Grants, Federal Stafford $6,000 Loans and Institutional Grants/Scholarships $5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000 Avg. Out of Pocket Costs- $1,689 $0 PERCENT OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS DEMONSTRATING NEED WHO WERE AWARDED A NEED-BASED SCHOLARSHIP OR GRANT IN 2010-2011
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% OU UT BGSU KSU OSU UA Miami UC % 92% 90% 76% 76% 71% 56% 53% 48% WHY IS THE TUITION DISCOUNT RATE IN THE DASHBOARD?
Enrollment .Recruitment .Enrollment Plan
Access Goals
Net Tuition Revenue GROUP 1 FACULTY FACULTY CLASSIFICATIONS AT OHIO UNIVERSITY
Group 1 . Individuals on tenure or tenure-track appointments who are employed in at least three quarters of a fiscal year Group 2 . Individuals holding part-time appointments who are primarily considered instructional personnel Group 3 . Individuals holding part-time appointments who are primarily considered instructional personnel but differ from Group 2 because of the more recent date of their initial employment or the irregularity of their employment Group 4 . Individuals holding visiting professor or other full-time appointments, adjunct professor, special appointments HOW IS GROUP 1 FACULTY CALCULATED?
Full-time Group 1 Faculty Tenured and Tenure Track Faculty Athens Group 1 Faculty Counted at Fall quarter COMPARATIVE DATA
Average for Ohio Four Year Publics (available for 2007 and 2009) 2007 85% OHIO 79% Four year publics in Ohio 2009 81% OHIO 77% Four year publics in Ohio
National Data 27% are tenure track compared to non-tenure track, adjuncts, and graduate assistants (NYT, Dec 30, 2009) COMPARATIVE DATA
Job Type 1997 2007 ALL INSTITUTIONS -Full time, tenured or tenure track 33.1% 27.3% -Full time, non-tenure track 14.2% 14.9% -Part time 34.1% 36.9% -Graduate assistants 18.6% 20.9% PUBLIC DOCTORAL GRANTING INSTITUTIONS -Full time, tenured or tenure track 34.1% 28.9% -Full time, non-tenure track 14.1% 14.4% -Part time 14.3% 15.8% -Graduate assistants 37.5% 41.0%
National Center for Education Statistics FACTORS INFLUENCING FACULTY DISTRIBUTION
Need to replace faculty temporarily on leave Use of adjuncts who bring special knowledge and experience into the academy Employment of a partner in a dual career recruitment Resistance on the part of some tenured faculty to teach some courses and to fill certain roles such as advisor The use of lecturers in administrative roles Budgetary savings Cross, J.G., & Goldenberg, E. N. (2002). Why hire non-tenure track faculty? Contingent Faculty and Student Learning Peer Review, 5 (1). GROUP 1 FACULTY RETENTION HOW IS GROUP 1 FACULTY RETENTION CALCULATED?
Full-time Athens campus Group 1 faculty Cohorts are tracked from Fall quarter of one year to the next year’s Fall quarter Reasons for faculty not returning are extracted from the HR system No comparative data exists for Ohio institutions * 6 Nursing Faculty6 Nursing moved fromto Athens regional campuses 07 2006- 06 to 2005- 08 2007- to 07 2006- 09 2008- 08 to 2007- 10 2009- 09 to 2008- 11 2010- to 10 2009- 4 9 92.9 691 744 91.3 684 749 91.6 665 726 96.2 683 710 93.9 683 727
Total
Continuing % % % % %
% 115 926 41.9 3 14 2.6% 3 2.0% 19 1.5% 15 2.8% 11 1.7 21 3.1% 12 3.6% 23 26 1.9% 14 1.7 81.1%9 12 1.8% 13 1.3 N Retired
%
Asst Prof Resign/Tenure Denied % %
% 81.1 1.4 10 Prof/Assoc Prof Resigned % % % %
% 03 18 09* 27
Deceased
Status Change but still at OU Total
Caucasian
Unknown
Two or more races
Nat American
International
Hispanic Hawaiian-Pacific Islander
Asian-American
African-American
Female
Male 441 0--000--078 331 0--011--036 621 0--001--158 120 1--000--023 Early Retired Retired/ Deceased 3044 3Resigned81111--021--11319 --2 --03 Change in Status Tenure Denied etc. Total222242 % 4.6 8.9 10.3 3.8 -- 0 5.7 50 -- 33.3 5.4 6.1 WHY IS RETENTION OF GROUP 1 FACULTY ON THE DASHBOARD?
Total compensation Goals .Recruiting New faculty .Building Senior Faculty .Success in accomplishing Four Fundamentals .Inspired teaching and research .Innovative academic programs .Exemplary student support services .Integrative co-curricular activities .Enrollment demands J. Brice Bible Chief Information Officer Office of Information Technology April 19-20, 2012 Rufus Student Information System (SIS) NextGen Network & Voice System Information Security Academic Technologies Modernization
2 3 Campus Community Admissions Transfer Credit Financial Aid Student Records Student Financials PeopleSoft Campus Solutions ------•
All modules live Fall Quarter 2011 Rufus implementation included: Rufus implementation included: • Talisma CRM • Identity Management • University Portal • Enterprise Reporting & Intelligence (ERI)
4 • Millions of cleansed records converted from legacy SIS • Implemented with least amount of modifications possible • Enhanced self-service capabilities • Enabled workflow automations • Excellent system performance & availability
5 • Semester Transition (Q2S) - Student statistics conversion - Enhanced advisement tools (TDCP), OCEAN - Transfer Credit rules conversion • Financial Aid – loans & scholarships • Reporting • Continuation of lower priority development • Mainframe student data migration
6 • Wired Network - 80% Completed Main Campus - 50% Completed Regional Campuses - Received Bond 2 Disbursement on March 7, 2012
• Wireless Network - Vendor Selection for Pilot Completed - Initial Pilot System Installation Completed - Pilot Scheduled to Begin in May - CSC, HDL, Stocker, Alden & Baker Center
7 8 • Current telephone switch is 25yr old Ericcson PBX - Plus five additional PBX phone systems at the Regional Campuses • Elected to implement as joint project with Bowling Green, Shawnee State & OARnet (Chancellor’s Office) - Expanded to include State Government • Will both consolidate all OHIO campus systems & create modern Unified Communications offerings • Currently working with manufacturers to develop final technical design for best & final pricing
9 3/13/12 - Microsoft RDP Connections per hour
released patch MS12- 120000 020 to address a critical flaw 100000 3/12/12-3/14/12 – 80000 Targeted “recon scans” begin 60000 3/16/12 Microsoft and 40000 Blocked SANS announce that a Permitted exploit has been seen 20000 “in the wild” 0 3/16/12 13:30 OHIO begins blocking RDP at
the border 3/1/2012 0:00 3/6/2012 9:00 3/8/2012 4:00 3/2/2012 19:00 3/4/2012 14:00 3/9/2012 23:00 3/15/2012 9:00 3/17/2012 4:00 3/11/2012 19:00 3/13/2012 14:00 3/18/2012 23:00
10 •If existing scanning Network must •Machines Registration Network
contain it measures take broad longer haveto we wouldno a vulnerability, process finds scanning think cars to anowner– be registered to
What •CALEA “Private •CALEA Safe •DMCA Compliance can •Currently Increased risk Network” Harbor minutes would take NetReg, it system. With a compromised ever) toisolate take hours(if
Why timeline determine FTAG to Working with and Staff– For Faculty Semester by Fall Students – For
When 11 • Support the Provost’s office with increased instructional design in the Alden Faculty Commons • Working with e-learning to incorporate distance program use of current/future Academic Technology tools & services • Conducting monthly Faculty Showcase events presenting technology best practices • Developing partnership with WOUB, OU-HCOM & other Colleges in the build-out of OIT academic web conferencing solution & implementation of lecture capture in selected Athens and Regional classrooms (C3T) • Exploring implementation of mobile services & electronic classroom content (ebooks, tablets, etc.) - Sprint-HTC-McGraw-Hill pilot project
12 Sprint-HTC-McGraw-Hill Pilot Project
• OIT partnered with 3 faculty, Sprint, McGraw-Hill, & HTC to provide a pilot to students in one graduate course & one undergraduate course using the HTC EVO mobile device during winter quarter of 2011-12
• Two presentations accepted at OHECC regarding data from the pilot: - Beyond the Cloud: Using Mobile Tablets in the Higher Education Classroom to Enhance Teaching & Learning - Creating a Collaborative Partnering Environment to Support Mobile Learning Technology Initiatives
13 Implement new wireless network & begin rollout of new network-based phone system Continue to build-out information security policies & protections Support Business Systems improvements & RCM services Continue to refine/improve new SIS services Modernize multi-modal academic technology systems & services Continue to improve staff skills & customer support culture
14
EVPP UPDATES, APRIL Q2S & SEARCHE 2012 S UPDATE ON Q2S: IMPORTANT TRANSITION TASKS
Semester curricula 2012-13 Undergraduate Catalog Fall 2012 Class Catalog Encoding semester to quarter equivalencies Advising TRANSITION DEGREE COMPLETION PLANS
4,400 TDCP’s completed with final approval Many are in the review and approval process May 1 deadline but anticipate processing until the end of the term Encouraging students to complete the TDCP Keeping the promise UPDATE ON SEARCHES
Vice President for Student Affairs . Search Firm: Spelman & Johnson . April 9: Deadline for applications . Week of April 16: Search committee review of applications . Week of April 30: Airport interviews . Week of May 7: Campus interviews
Dean of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine . Search Firm: R. William Funk & Associates . April 15: Deadline for applications . Week of April 16: Search committee review of applications . Week of May 7: Airport interviews . Week of May 28: Campus interviews UPDATE ON SEARCHES
Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion . April 16: Deadline for applications . Week of April 16: Search committee review of applications . Week of April 30: Airport interviews . Week of May 7: Campus interviews
Vice Provost for E-Learning and Strategic Partnerships . Airport interviews completed . Candidates to visit campus week of May 30
Dean of the Scripps College of Communication (Fall 2012) Dean of the College of Fine Arts (Fall 2012)
FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE EMERITUS/EMERITA AWARDS RESOLUTION 2012
WHEREAS, the following individuals have rendered dedicated and outstanding service to Ohio University, and
WHEREAS, their colleagues and supervisors have recommended action to recognize their service,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that emeritus/emerita status be awarded the individuals on the attached page upon their retirement.
Ohio University Emeriti Nominations April 2012
First Middle Last Yrs. Suf. Campus Emeritus/Emerita Title Name Name Name Serv. Administrative George W. Bain Athens 20 Librarian Emeritus of Archives and Special Collections Terry W. Conry Athens 28 Chief of Staff for Finance and Administration Emeritus Larry Corrigan Athens 34 Associate Director for Finance and Treasurer Emeritus Thomas Davis Athens 26 Professor Emeritus of Counseling & Higher Ed./Secretary Emeritus to the Board of Trustees John W. Furlow Jr. Lancaster 18 Dean Emeritus of Ohio University Lancaster John Kotowski Athens 32 Associate Vice President for Facilities Emeritus Jenny LaRue Lancaster 27 Communications and Marketing Manager Emerita Susan Rae Loughridge Athens 35 Grants Information Manager Emerita of Research and Sponsored Programs Cheryl Ann Riley Athens 30 Assistant Dean Emerita of Academic Affairs Wanda S, Rohrbough Athens 23 Librarian Emerita of Collections and Access Gretchen L. Stephens Athens 26 Director of Event Services Emerita D. Keith Watson Athens 13 Senior Associate Dean Emeritus of Academic Affairs Wanda J. Weinberg Athens 32 Librarian Emerita of Reference College of Arts and Sciences Ernest Leon Anderson Athens 23 Professor Emeritus of Sociology John William Bagnole Athens 25 Senior Lecturer Emeritus of Ohio Program of Intensive English Kenneth L. Brown Athens 16 Professor Emeritus of Chemistry and Biochemistry Bruce David Bruce Athens 26 Instructor Emeritus of English Hannah Jane Denbow Athens 31 Instructor Emeritus of English Linn Elizabeth Forhan Athens 33 Senior Lecturer Emerita of Ohio Program of Intensive English Miriam Foley Hart Athens 18 Assistant Professor Emerita of English Robert L. Kinsley Athens 25 Instructor Emeritus of English John McVicker Athens 27 Senior Lecturer Emeritus of Ohio Program of Intensive English Patricia Bayer Richard Athens 40 Professor Emerita of Political Science Lowell J. Ver Heul Athens 34 Assistant Professor Emeritus of English College of Business Natalie Chieffe Athens 17 Associate Professor Emerita of Finance College of Fine Arts Janet Gail Berenson Athens 37 Professor Emerita of Music Holly Cole Athens 25 Professor Emerita of Costume Design and Costume Crafts Peter G Jarjisian Athens 28 Professor Emeritus of Music Allyn D. Reilly Athens 37 Professor Emeritus of Music Marina Walchli Athens 25 Professor Emerita of Dance College of Health Sciences and Professions Majorie T. Hagerman Athens 12 Assistant Professor Emerita of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine John A. Brose Athens 30 Professor Emeritus of Family Medicine Edwin C. Rowland Athens 26 Associate Professor Emeritus of Parasitology Patton College of Education William Earl Smith Athens 24 Professor Emeritus of Teacher Education Marta Roth Athens 25 Associate Professor Emerita of Teacher Education Ohio University Emeriti Nominations April 2012
First Middle Last Yrs. Suf. Campus Emeritus/Emerita Title Name Name Name Serv. Regional Campuses Vernon Allen Zanesville 24 Assistant Professor Emeritus of Art Andrea Baker Lancaster 31 Associate Professor Emerita of Social Sciences and Applied Sciences John Benson Zanesville 38 Associate Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences David O. Harding Chillicothe 31 Associate Professor Emeritus of Law Enforcement Technology Jan E. Schmittauer Chillicothe 20 Associate Professor Emerita of English Sharon Staib Zanesville 23 Associate Professor Emerita of Nursing Marilyn Westgerdes Zanesville 10 Assistant Professor Emerita of Art Kuruvilla Zachaariah Eastern 20 Associate Professor Emeritus of Chemistry Russ College of Engineering and Technology Israel Urieli Athens 28 Associate Professor Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering Scripps College of Communication Bojinka Bishop Athens 18 Associate Professor Emerita of Journalism Anne Cooper-Chen Athens 27 Professor Emerita of Journalism Patricia Westfall Athens 25 Professor Emerita of Journalism
Total Years of Service to Ohio University 1223 Average Years of Service to Ohio University 26.02 FACULTY FELLOWSHIP AWARDS
RESOLUTION 2012-
WHEREAS, the proposed University Faculty Fellowships on the attached list have been reviewed in accordance with University policy and found to be meritorious.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the attached University Faculty Fellowships for 2012- 2013 be approved, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Vice President and Provost can approve changes in the conditions of the fellowships but not the total number of fellowships granted for the academic year.
Academic Terms of College Dept_School First Name Last Name Brief Description of Leave Leave Attend and participate in 6 week-long workshops and other related activities in Computational College of Arts and Department of William Holmes Fall and Spring Neuroscience during the "Emphasis Year on Mathematical Neuroscience" at the Mathematical Sciences Biological Sciences Biosciences Institute at the Ohio State University. College of Arts and Department of Travel to Maryland to study the overwintering ecology of adult diamondback terrapins in their native Willem Roosenburg Spring Sciences Biological Sciences habitat. Will also study natural emergence of hatching from their nest in the early spring. Department of College of Arts and Classics and World James Andrews Fall Submit a book for publication before the end of 2012. Sciences Religion College of Arts and Department of Vahe Lskavyan Spring Collect and analyze data for research on corporate governance. Sciences Economics College of Arts and Department of I will work on two related projects relevant to my area of teaching and research specialization: the Joseph McLaughlin Spring Sciences English Victorian novel. College of Arts and Department of Completing a literary biography of Wallace Thurman, a pivotal figure from the Harlem Renaissance of the Amritjit Singh Fall and Spring Sciences English 1920's. Department of College of Arts and Visit France to carry out experimental work to elucidate the three-dimensional structure of a multi-protein Environmental and Ahmed Faik Fall Sciences complete involved in xylan biosynthesis in wheat. Plant Biology College of Arts and Department of To generate a manuscript for a textbook on paleobiogeographic methods to be published by Columbia Alycia Stigal Spring Sciences Geological Sciences University Press.
College of Arts and Department of Work on the production of a book manuscript that will examine the lives of the mixed-race descendants of Mariana Dantas Spring Sciences History Jacinto Vieira da Costa, a wealthy 18th-century slave and property owner in colonial Minas Gerais, Brazil. Planning to investigate the existence and multiplicity of solutions to boundary value problems associated College of Arts and Department of Sergiu Aizicovici Spring with nonlinear differential and partial differential equations, and start writing a related research monograph Sciences Mathematics with Professors Nikolaos Papageorgiou and Vasile Staicu. Co-directing and doing mathematics education research related to the Woodrow Wilson Teaching Fellows College of Arts and Department of Jeff Connor Fall and Spring program and mathematical research that includes the completion of a past research project and two new Sciences Mathematics research projects. My time will be divided between Athens, Ohio and Toronto, Ontario. Participating in special Thematic College of Arts and Department of Erick Eisworth Fall Program on Forcing and its Applications at the Fields Institute in Toronto and finishing my portion of a Sciences Mathematics manuscript on Iterated Forcing and the Continuum Hypothesis. To improve the department's graduate course offering in differential equations and optimization theory by College of Arts and Department of Nicolai Pavel Fall expanding and updating my text on partial differential equations and continuing research in differential Sciences Mathematics equations. Department of College of Arts and Physics and Madappa Prakash Spring Research activities will be conducted for at least 5-6 weeks in Athens and 9-10 weeks at other institutions. Sciences Astronomy Department of College of Arts and Physics and Nancy Sandler Fall and Spring Spent at the Dahlem Center for Complex Systems and the Dept. of Physics and Freie University of Berlin. Sciences Astronomy Department of College of Arts and Spending it in the Astronomy Department at the University of Maryland, College Park, collaborating with Physics and Thomas Statler Fall and Spring Sciences Profs. Derek Richardson and Christopher Reynolds. Astronomy Department of College of Arts and Visiting and carrying out research in condensed matter theory, as a guest of the Freie University in Berlin, Physics and Sergio Ulloa Fall and Spring Sciences Germany. Astronomy Complete first draft of second book on international security. Research will combine international security College of Arts and Department of Maria Fanis Fall and Spring with the study of globalization and will take place at the University of Oxford Programme on the Changing Sciences Political Science Character of War. Research collaboration and manuscript writing; attend numerous colloquia and brown bag sessions at the College of Arts and Department of Department of Psychology, Ohio State University. Further current research in the areas of mental Keith Markman Spring Sciences Psychology simulation and meaning making. I will have opportunities to attend talks and interact with visiting scholars from all over the world. Department of College of Arts and Research in legal and political anthropology, focuses on state violence and militarization, popular protest Sociology and Haley Duschinski Fall and Spring Sciences and resistance. Anthropology Field research at a number of manufacturing and enterprise system data collection sites, completing Department of several related papers, and developing a new research agenda exploring the relationships between cloud College of Business Management Sean McGann Spring computing and enterprise systems. Collaborate with top IS researchers at Pepperdine and Case Western Information Systems Reserve. School of Conduct field research with sports organizations of various kinds concerning the financial management College of Business Robert Sarikas Spring Accountancy problems they face and the approaches they take to deal with these financial problems. Begin research on her new book project dealing with site specific performance art. This leave will result in College of Fine Arts School of Art Jennie Klein Spring a book that deals with site-specific work from an international and culturally diverse perspective. Produce two projects: a multi-media installation, Mental Radio and Hidden Mother, a non-fiction book and exhibition. Mental Radio will be based Upton Sinclair's eponymously titled book chronicling experiments College of Fine Arts School of Art Laura Larson Fall and Spring he and his wife Mary Craig undertook to test her powers of mental telepathy. Hidden Mother, currently a work in progress presents a discussion of the "hidden mother" in 19th century portrait photography. To complete the book "Collecting, Publishing, and Artistic Identity: The Art of Fei Danxu (1802-1850)." I College of Fine Arts School of Art Marion Lee Fall and Spring will spend the academic year in China, based in three cities Shanghai, Hangzhou, and Beijing. Make greater progress on two projects, related to previous professional work (rooting studio production in conceptual concerns of architectural space/place that generated paintings and papers) that were begun in College of Fine Arts School of Art Vincent Wojtas Fall the last year, which, thereafter would be presented in the form of exhibitions, publications or presentations at a national or international level. To conduct independent (non-collaborative) work to compose music for percussion including new pieces College of Fine Arts School of Music Roger Braun Fall for percussion ensemble, vibraphone, and a marimba solo. I will also continue my research interest in the music of Brazilian composer, Hermeto Pascoal, adding to my series of arrangements of his music. Continue work on two projects: development of a play that will be the result of personal genealogical research I began over the summer; consisting of DNA testing that traced my paternal ancestry back to the College of Fine Arts School of Theater Charles Smith Spring West African nation of Guinea-Bissau. The second project is the development of a play based upon the Liberia to Australia immigration of a young man named Shedrick Kennedy Yarkpai whom I met in 2009 when I was in Adelaide, Australia. College of Health School of Applied Become a visiting scientist in the lab of tropical and subtropical and subtropical fruit expert Dr. Stephen Sciences and Health Sciences and Robert Brannan Spring Talcott (Texas A&M University) which will enhance my research expertise in a manner that is especially Professions Wellness relevant to my current research thrust. School of College of Health Writing two books and furthering my primary research program. I will maintain and expand research Rehabilitation and Sciences and Brooke Hallowell Fall and Spring collaborations, continue to write research articles for publication, and ensure that my PhD students Communication Professions receive mentorship to support their progress. Sciences Conduct comparative research at museum collections in Europe, Africa, and throughout the US, develop new laboratory/computational skills during a two-month research visit focused on tooth development at Heritage College of Department of the institute of Biotechnology at the University of Helsinki, Finland, and develop new analytical skills for Osteopathic Patrick O'Connor Spring Biomedical Sciences characterizing form-function relationships using engineering-based approaches (e.g. FEM/FEA) aimed at Medicine understanding dental function in amniotes. This taking place in the Department of Organismal Biology and Anatomy at the University of Chicago. Heritage College of Department of Conduct NSF-funded research on comparative vertebrate morphology in museum collections in the USA, Osteopathic Nancy Stevens Spring Biomedical Sciences Europe, and Africa. Medicine DNP project is related to advance nursing practice and education of intensive care patients and nurses on eye care. Leave activity objectives: complete literature search for the development of educational eye Regional Higher Ohio University Camille Leadingham Spring care material, develop an educational presentation on the care of the eye for mechanically ventilated Education Chillicothe Campus patients, complete my Evidence Based project proposal manuscript to my committee, complete Wright State University (WSU) IRB procedures, and obtain WSU advisor feedback and project approval. Regional Higher Ohio University Conduct research on the construction of new quantum algorithms, and the building of statistical tools via Zijian Diao Fall Education Eastern Campus quantum techniques. Regional Higher Ohio University Plans to write, rewrite, record, mix, and produce an "album" of ten to twelve parodic songs about modern Michael Nern Spring Education Zanesville Campus life that would focus on work and family issues and the press of technology upon both. Further develop my research on computational models of cognitive intelligent systems, supporting a long Russ College of School of Electrical term objective of developing self-organizing architectures for autonomous robots and intelligent machines. Engineering and Engineering and Janusz Starzyk Fall Planned activities include initializing joint research programs with researchers at Air Force Research Technology Computer Science Laboratory (ARL) in Dayton, and Agency for Science Technology and Research (A*STAR) in Singapore in the area of embodied intelligence and cognitive vision. Scripps College of E.W. Scripps School Gathering of information and writing of a full-length biography of journalist Pauline Frederick, tentatively Marilyn Greenwald Spring Communication of Journalism titled, Paying Her Dues: The Struggles of Pauline Frederick in Television News.
Scripps College of E.W. Scripps School Work on a book about audience feedback to news media. This extends Dr. Reader's research related to Bill Reader Spring Communication of Journalism this topic, dating back to his master's thesis. McClure School of Perform research on additional scenarios to learn more about the structure and operation of the U.S. Scripps College of Information & John Hoag Fall power system. This research agenda has developed from analysis of performance of telecommunications Communication Telecommunications networks in general to those specifically for the electric Smart Grid. Syst. School of Scripps College of Writing a book on soap opera fandom. I have a program of research on interpretive communities of Communication Christina Beck Spring Communication television viewers and this book will feature data gathered over the past two and a half years. Studies Work on a feature length documentary film examining the current natural gas land rush occurring Scripps College of School of Media Arts Casey Hayward Fall and Spring throughout southeast Ohio, focusing on the impacts on relationships between neighbors and within rural Communication and Studies communities. Continue my consulting work with Nexus Communications and various advocacy groups to save federal Scripps College of School of Media Arts George Korn Fall and Spring Lifeline call phone program, which was designed to keep low income Americans connected to vital Communication and Studies services and improve their lives.
VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH & CREATIVE ACTIVITY NAME CHANGE OF THE ARHI DIABETES CENTER @ OHIO UNIVERSITY HERITAGE COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE TO THE DIABETES INSTITUTE AT OHIO UNIVERSITY
RESOLUTION 2012 -
WHEREAS, efforts at Ohio University to understand and treat diabetes increasingly involve collaborations across colleges, and
WHEREAS, the new name reflects the institute’s more comprehensive mission, the aims of the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations grant, and the work being undertaken to develop an Ohio University Health Sciences Center, and
WHEREAS, the proposed name has the support of the Faculty involved with the center, the Executive Vice President and Provost, the Vice President for Research and Creative Activity, the Dean of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, and the Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University hereby approves that the ARHI Diabetes Center @ Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine be renamed The Diabetes Institute at Ohio University. Research & Technology Ctr 120 Athens, OH 45701
T: 740.593.0370 F: 740.593.0380 [email protected] Research Division and Graduate College
March 30, 2012
Executive Vice President & Provost Pam Benoit Cutler Hall Ohio University
Dear Provost Benoit:
I am writing to express my support for the request by the ARHI Diabetes Endocrine Center @ OU-HCOM and its Director, Dr. Frank Schwartz, M.D., to change the name of the center to:
The Diabetes Institute at Ohio University
The new name reflects the center’s more comprehensive mission and aligns with the consolidation of the many entities that focus on diabetes and metabolic diseases at Ohio University under one institute. I believe that this new identity appropriately represents the evolution of the center to encompass a broader scope of activities while enhancing its relationships with external sponsors. As the institute evolves I am committed to helping its leadership and that of the Health Sciences Center to develop sustainable strategies for funding diabetes research, programming, and commercialization of associated intellectual property.
Sincerely,
Joseph C. Shields Vice President for Research & Creative Activity Dean of the Graduate College
March 29, 2012
Joseph Shields, Ph.D. Vice President for Research & Creative Activity Dean of the Graduate College Ohio University Athens, Ohio 45701
Dear Dr. Shields:
After consultation with the Director of the ARHI Diabetes Center @Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, the Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions, and the Director of the Diabetes Research Initiative (DRI) and its members, I would like to formally request that the ARHI Diabetes Endocrine Center @ OU-HCOM change the name of the center to:
The Diabetes Institute at Ohio University
I believe the name change effectively reflects the organization of efforts in the area of diabetes and metabolic diseases, the aims of the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations grant, and the Health Sciences Center at Ohio University. As we work toward meeting the expectations of both the OHF grant and the health sciences center, this new identity will best communicate the collaboration of various entities dedicated to diabetes research, clinical services, education, and outreach.
Sincerely,
Dean Jack Brose, D.O. Dean, Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine Ohio University Athens, Ohio 45701
Office of the Dean Grover Center W379 Athens, Ohio 45701-2979 T: (740) 593-9336 F: (740) 593-1208 College of Health Sciences And Professions
March 29, 2012
Joseph Shields, Ph.D. Vice President for Research & Creative Activity Dean of the Graduate College Ohio University Athens, Ohio 45701
Dear Dr. Shields:
After consultation with the Director of the ARHI Diabetes Center @ Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, the Dean of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, and the Director of the Diabetes Research Initiative (DRI) and its members, I would like to formally request that the ARHI Diabetes Endocrine Center @ OU-HCOM change the name of the Center to:
The Diabetes Institute at Ohio University
The purpose of this name change is to facilitate the evolution of the center to a unit that reflects a broader scope of activities. In addition, I believe the proposed name change best represents the consolidation of entities working on diabetes and metabolic diseases, in the College of Health Sciences and Professions and the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine. As we continue to organize, and leverage our collaborative efforts, it is critical to communicate a coordinated model. This name change will best embody the current organization and aims of our diabetes and metabolic disease foci.
Sincerely,
Randy Leite, Ph.D. Dean, College of Health Sciences and Professions
March 29, 2012
Joseph Shields, Ph.D. Vice President for Research & Creative Activity Dean of the Graduate College Ohio University Athens, Ohio 45701
Dear Dr. Shields:
After consultation with Deans Brose and Leite, and with the Director of the Diabetes Research Initiative and its members, I would like to formally request that the ARHI Diabetes Endocrine Center @ OU-HCOM name be change the to:
The Diabetes Institute at Ohio University
This name change also will reflect its new home in the Health Sciences Center and best reflects the increased collaboration of Ohio University faculty, staff, and students in the academic, basic sciences and clinical arenas since its inception. This important new institute will position Ohio University at the forefront of the Appalachian region to address the epidemic of diabetes and metabolic diseases through teaching, research and service efforts have grown enormously. The deans of both HSP and OU-HCOM are in full support of this name change.
Sincerely,
Frank L Schwartz, MD FACE Prof. of Endocrinology J O Watson Chair for Diabetes Research Director: ARHI Diabetes Center @ Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine 331 Academic Research Center Athens, OH 45701
OHIO UNIVERSITY HERITAGE COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE CREATION OF A DEPARTMENT OF OSTEOPATHIC MANIPULATIVE MEDICINE
RESOLUTION 2012-
WHEREAS, the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine has indicated that the creation of a Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine will serve a critical function for the college’s future, and
WHEREAS, the proposed department has the support of the Faculty and Dean of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, the Executive Vice President and Provost, and has been deemed by representatives of the University Curriculum Council and the Regent’s Advisory Committee on Graduate Study to be feasible without further review or approval, and
WHEREAS, the establishment of the department involves no change in the graduate medical program name, curriculum, or delivery method but involves a change in the organizational structure within the college.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University hereby approves the creation of a Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine in the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine.
September 2, 2011
Board of Trustees Ohio University
Re: Proposal for Department Status – Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine within the Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine (OU‐HCOM)
Dear Board Members:
Attached is a proposal for department status with supporting documentation. This proposal has the support of the dean of the OU‐HCOM and its executive committee. I have checked with the chairmen of the ‘Programs Committee’ of Ohio University and the RACGS committee of the Board of Regents. Since there is no change in programs or transfer of programs, they communicated that they do not need to review the proposal or give their approval. It has been given approval by the provost.
We ask for your consideration of this proposal and your approval. I look forward to being available should there be any questions.
Sincerely,
David C. Eland, D.O., FAAO Head, Section of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine Department of Family Medicine 249 Grosvenor Hall Athens, OH 45701 (740) 593‐4787 [email protected] Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine (OMM) Department Proposal
Historically, the OMM faculty has been members of the section of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine in the department of Family Medicine at the Ohio University – Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine since the Osteopathic College’s inception in the late 1970s. The OMM curriculum has evolved over the course of time to encompass years 1 & 2, but has also developed and implemented clinically oriented OMM curricula in years 3 & 4 with an eye toward reinforcement during residency training. The expanded role and recognition of OMM importance in the overall curriculum both argue for recognition of a department of OMM.
The OMM section is given wide latitude to direct its activities within the department of Family Medicine and has enjoyed the support of its chair. The section has its own operating budget. The section operates within the overall curriculum and its checks and balances in the same manner as departments do. The section is expected to allocate faculty resources appropriately and efficiently. The section head makes needed requests for additional faculty and organizes the curricular efforts through the first two years into the first summer of year 3. The section has just had one section member retire (and receive emeritus professor status). There are currently three OMM faculty members. Given the increasing class size and the anticipated addition of 50 students in a Columbus campus, recruitment is proceeding with the goal of attracting two additional OMM faculty members.
Faculty shifting to the proposed OMM department: • David C. Eland, D.O., FAAO, professor and current section head • Stevan Walkowski, D.O., CSPOMM • Michael Soroka, D.O. • Anthony Chila, D.O. (currently emeritus professor in family medicine) • 2 additional OMM faculty
There are also 3 ‘OMM Fellows’ per year who dedicate an additional year to advanced academic and clinical training before graduation. They would work within the proposed OMM department. They are integral to the year 1 & 2 curriculum effort. The OMM Fellows receive additional academic and clinical training during this extra year dedicated to the fellowship before receiving their DO degree.
An elective ‘OMM Honors’ course for the year 2 students has been in place for two years. This course provides advanced training for those year 2 students with an interest in developing their Osteopathic manipulative medicine palpatory and treatment skills beyond the level possible in the basic OMM course sequence. Students who apply and qualify for participation get this advanced training and also have the opportunity to participate in an OMM journal club and faculty development presentations. They hone teaching skills as table trainers in the year 1 OMM labs. This program is the responsibility of the OMM faculty with assistance from OU‐HCOM faculty development specialists.
Given class sizes for years 1 and 2, the OMM teaching effort will continue to require the assistance of other OU‐HCOM faculty in the OMM labs, particularly year 2 labs. In particular, the Department of Family Medicine faculty, outside of the OMM section, have been willing and effective participants in the OMM curriculum delivery. We have had the good fortune to have several Athens community Osteopathic physicians table train in the year 2 labs, as well. We look forward to continuing collaboration with both groups of physicians. Historically, the OMM faculty have also been preceptors for residents participating in a one year postgraduate OMM residency program associated with O’Bleness Hospital. Such residents participate fully in the OMM teaching program at all levels.
This is a critical time in the Osteopathic profession’s history where we are being asked to define our uniqueness in comparison to the only other unlimited licensure profession in the United States, medical doctors (MDs). Our graduates are in many of the more prestigious residency programs around the country. They are being asked to justify their existence as an independent profession. OMM is the embodiment of the most significant difference between the two unlimited licensure professions. As such, it is critical that OMM become a distinct department within OU‐HCOM.
Norman Gevitz, PhD. has been a chronicler of the profession for many years and has written several books on the Osteopathic profession. He was the chair of the OUCOM Department of Social Medicine until retiring several years ago. In an editorial in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association (JAOA, Vol 6, No 3, March 2006, pp. 121‐129), Dr. Gevitz commented on the Osteopathic profession and its future. He advocated, under the ‘Organization’ subheading (p. 127), that every osteopathic medical school should have a department for their OMM faculty. His argument suggests the importance of the recognition of the OMM faculty within their specialty and, more importantly, the need for an equal voice in the affairs of the college, in keeping with the importance of Osteopathic principles and practice within Osteopathic training. The majority of Osteopathic colleges in the United States have departments for their OMM faculty [19 of the 23 colleges of Osteopathic Medicine from around the country that responded to a query about department status are departments; 19 of 21 colleges that have a department structure; the other two have no departments within their administrative structure].
The two year OMM course sequence is part of the larger curriculum and is set for the year 1 & 2 students by the OU‐HCOM curriculum advisory committee. No department in OU‐HCOM has its own courses, but each participates in the overall curriculum where appropriate. During the first two years, on average, OMM presents two hours of lab per student (two groups of 70 students in each lab) each week. This represents 8 hours of OMM lab time for faculty each week. On average, there is one additional lecture hour every other week.
The proposed change for the OMM section to department status involves no change in the graduate medical program name, curriculum or delivery method. This proposal simply asks for a change in departmental structure with OU‐HCOM. It has the support of the dean and the HCOM executive committee (discussed at June 15, 2011 meeting).
COM's OMM Faculty Status Department Section Other ATSU X ATSU-SOMA X AZCOM X CHICAGO X DMU - OMM (Des Moines) X FLORIDA X KCOM X No departments; just LECOM courses No departments; just LECOM - Bradenton courses LMUDCOM X OKLAHOMA STATE X OREGON X PCOM-GA X PIKESVILLE X RVU-COM X TCOM X TOURO - CALIFORNIA X TOUROCOM - HARLEM X TUNCOM X UNECOM X
Discipline Chair in larger department with disciplines including FP, Geriatrics, Peds, Internal Med, Sports VCOM Med, NMMOMM WCUCOM (JJ) X westernU-COMP X
COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES AND PROFESSIONS SCHOOL OF APPLIED HEALTH SCIENCES AND WELLNESS DIABETES CERTIFICATE
RESOLUTION 2012-
WHEREAS, the School of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness has proposed offering an undergraduate Diabetes Certificate, and
WHEREAS, the proposed certificate has the support of the Faculty and Dean of the College of Health Sciences and Professions, the University Curriculum Council, and the Executive Vice President and Provost, and
WHEREAS, the proposed certificate is unique for Ohio University because it focuses on a specific disease that is of intense local interest due to its high prevalence locally and nationwide, and
WHEREAS, this program reaches beyond the classroom, providing undergraduate students from various disciplines an opportunity to become more familiar with diabetes and its management, and
WHEREAS, the development of this certificate program will be partially funded by an 1804 grant.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University hereby approves offering the Diabetes Certificate by the School of Applied Health Sciences and Wellness.
RENAMING OF THE “OU-COM SOCITY OF ALUMNI AND FRIENDS CAFÉ”
RESOLUTION 2012--
WHEREAS, the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations and Charles R. and Marilyn Y. Stuckey’s Academic and Research Center welcomes students, faculty, staff, alumni and visitors to learning and discovery into the 21st Century, and
WHEREAS, the facility allows for the exploration and advancement of medicine and clinical treatments, science, engineering and technology, and
WHEREAS, partnerships between Ohio University’s Russ College of Engineering and Technology and College of Osteopathic Medicine allows researchers to meet and discuss projects, which, in turn, may inspire the creation of new knowledge, and
WHEREAS, the partnerships established by this facility will help advance the field of bioengineering and will create opportunities for Ohio University students, and
WHEREAS, the generous support of many donors for spaces and areas within the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations & Charles R. and Marilyn Y. Stuckey Academic and Research Center is providing this integrated learning experience.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED at the request of the OU-HCOM Society of Alumni & Friends that the space currently named “OU-COM Society of Alumni & Friends Café” be re-named “Jack’s Place” in honor of John A. Brose, D.O., Dean of the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine for his extraordinary contributions to Ohio University, the osteopathic profession and, to recognize him for the difference he has made in the lives of so many students, physicians, medical researchers and peers.
AGENDA Governance Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 125 4:30 p.m. – Thursday, April 19, 2012
28. Consent Agenda, Meeting Dates for Succeeding Year 2012-2013 Nominations for Chair and Vice Chair Update on Student Trustee Selection Process Update on National Trustee Selection Process By-Law Revision Update
MEETING DATES FOR SUCCEEDING YEAR
Designation of Stated Meeting Dates for Years Beginning July 1, 2012 and Ending June 30, 2013
RESOLUTION 2012 –
RESOLVED that the following dates be designated the stated meeting dates for the year beginning July 1, 2012, and ending June 30, 2013.
September 6, 2012 (Meeting) COMMENCEMENT September 7, 2012 (Retreat) May 11, 2013 - OUCOM May 3, 2013 - Graduate November 15-16, 2012 May 4, 2013 - Undergraduate
February 7-8, 2013 (Eastern Campus)
April 18-19, 2013
June 20-21, 2013
RESOLVED further that, if conditions dictate, the Executive Committee be authorized to change the date of the stated meetings.
AGENDA Audit Committee Margaret M. Walter Hall, Room 127 4:30 p.m. - Thursday, April 19, 2012
29. Internal Audit Update 30. Upcoming FY12 Audit, Plante and Moran 31. University Risk Management Initiative Update
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Date: April 6, 2012
To: The President and Board of Trustees
From: Chief Audit Executive Jeff Davis, CPA, CIA, CISA, CFE
Subject: Internal Audit Update
Internal Audit will present an update of progress in completing the FY 12 work plan at the April 19, 2012 Audit Committee Meeting. Audit plan completion, staffing, special projects, audit process and audit ratings will be addressed.
I will be pleased to answer any questions you might have prior to or during the meeting.
Janetta King, Trustee April 19, 2012
1
Jeffrey Davis, CPA, CIA,CFE,CISA
2 Audit Plan Completion IA Staffing Recent Special Projects Audit Process • Routine Audit Considerations • Airport • OIT Lifecycle Management Audit Ratings
3 Audit Auditor Status Report Date President’s Office Ries Completed 1/30/12 Printing Resources Ennis Completed 1/27/12 Provost’s Office Davis Completed 1/27/12 Airport Ennis In Process OIT – Lifecycle Management Ries/Ennis In Process Legal Affairs Ries Open Graduate College Postponed
4 Report Follow-Up Audit Auditor Status Date Baker University Center Davis Completed 2/27/12 General Accounting and Reporting Ries Completed 3/9/12 Grant Contract Administration Ries Completed 2/27/12 Residential Housing Ennis Completed 3/23/12 Scripps College of Communication Ennis Completed 3/23/12 Advancement/Foundation Accounting Davis Open Facilities Department Ennis Open Human Resources Davis Open Payroll and Tax Compliance Ries Open Procurement Services/Accounts Payable Ennis Open
5 Senior Auditor Tressa Ries promoted to Audit Manager Senior Auditor position currently open • IA actively working to fill this position
6 Assessment completed January 31st Completes obligation related to IUC quality assessment Process allowed IA staff to meet with University of Cincinnati President and other senior staff Opportunity to learn from other IUC institutions
7 Notification Entrance Preliminary Letter Conference Review
Exit Draft Audit Fieldwork Conference Report
Customer Final Audit Follow-Up Service Report Audit Survey
8 Perform Analytical Comparisons Review Expenditures: • PCard Transactions • Direct Payment and Purchase Order Transactions • Payroll Related Expenditures • Internal Billings Evaluate Internal Controls Assess Segregation of Duties Identify and Review Cash Collection Points Review Significant Contracts Verify Account Reconciliations
9 Assess Compliance with University Policy • Competitive Bidding, Deposits and Travel • Records Retention and Foundation Expenditures Identify and Review Tax Issues • IRS and Ohio Department of Taxation Evaluate Compliance with External Guidelines • NCAA Guidelines Review Compliance with other Federal Laws • HIPPA • FERPA
10 Evaluate Efficient Use of University Resources Assess Opportunities to Improve Processes Review Policies and Procedures Specific to the Unit
11 Identify Sensitive Data • Identity Finder Scans • Protect, Redact and Encrypt Verify Antivirus Automatic Updates, Firewalls and Backups Evaluate Vulnerability Scans Assess IT Inventory Control Review Access, Termination and Segregation of Duties
12
Airport Tenants • Leases and Payments Aircraft Maintenance • Sales and Inventory Fuel • Sales and Inventory Third Party Agreements FAA Compliance Issues Safety
13
Audit Focus is the University Data Center Auditing Three Distinct Areas • Acquisition • Management • Disposal Acquisition • Strategic Plan • Lifecycle Methodology • Procurement Process
14
Management • Inventory • Utilization of Resources • Change Control Disposal • Process and Procedure for Disposal • Sanitization
15 Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Inadequate
16 Fiscal Exceeds Meets Needs Year Expectations Expectations Improvement Inadequate Total FY08* 1 6 3 2 12 FY09 1 12 1 1 15
FY10 3 10 1 1 15
FY11 1 11 1 0 13
FY12 0 8 0 0 8 *
Total 6 47 6 4 63
Percent 10% 74% 10% 6% 100%
* Audits completed as of 4/19/12
17 A higher return on experience.
Ohio University Board of Trustees Audit Committee 2012 Audit Planning Meeting
April 19, 2012 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Audit Planning Agenda
• The Ohio University Audit Team • Reporting and Responsibilities • Audit Approach • Timing • Letter of Auditor Responsibilities and Peer Review Report • New Pronouncements
2 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Audit Team
Robert Shenton, Partner 614.222.9064 [email protected]
Keith Martinez, Manager 614.222.9086 [email protected]
Danny Sklenicka, In-Charge 614.222.9133 [email protected]
3 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Reporting and Responsibilities
• Plante Moran Deliverables • Opining on FY 2012 University Financial Statements and the University’s Federal programs • Opining on FY 2012 for the Foundation, the Inn-Ohio of Athens, Inc., Housing for Ohio, Inc., Russ Research Center LLC, and WOUB’s Financial Statements • Procedures related to compliance with NCAA Bylaws • State “Special Purpose” Report
• Plante Moran Responsibilities • To express an opinion on the University’s and the Foundation’s financial statements • To express an opinion on the major federal programs of the University • To express an opinion on the Inn-Ohio of Athens, Inc., Housing for Ohio, Inc. and Russ Research Center LLC’s financial statements • To express an opinion on WOUB’s financial statements • To provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance of detecting material misstatement • To gain an understanding of internal controls, policies, and procedures to design an effective audit
• Plante Moran will issue the following Reports and Letters for 2012: • Planning Stage • Letter on Auditor Responsibilities with required attachments • Engagement letter for procedures to be performed in accordance with NCAA Bylaws
4 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Reporting and Responsibilities (continued)
• Plante Moran will issue the following Reports and Letters for 2012 (continued): • At completion of work: • An opinion on the financial statements of the University, the Foundation, the component units of the Foundation and for WOUB • Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of the Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS report) for the University, the Foundation, the component units of the Foundation, and for WOUB • A SAS 114 Letter – Report on the Conduct of the Audit • OMB Circular A-133 reports and schedules Report on Compliance with Requirements Applicable to Each Major Program and on Internal Control over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 A Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs • A Management Recommendation Letter (SAS 115), if applicable • A Report on Agreed-Upon Procedures related to Intercollegiate Athletics in Accordance with NCAA Bylaws
5 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Audit Approach
• Financial Statement Audits (includes the Foundation and its component units) • General Controls Assessment and Paperless System testing (i.e., registration, tuition, and endowments) • Risk Based Approach – More time will be spent on those areas considered higher risk • Documentation and testing of key accounting processes and internal controls by major cycles – purchasing, expenditures and accounts payable, payroll and related year end liabilities, revenue, receipts and accounts receivable, investments and related income, financial reporting • PM to engage Manoranjan & Shaffer, Inc. as minority subcontractor • OMB Circular A-133 reports • Audit is performed in compliance with federal regulations and includes compliance and internal control categories as defined by OMB • NCAA Agreed-Upon Procedures • Suggested procedures for line items determined by NCAA • Higher-risk items will be tested based on discussions with management and knowledge of programs and related revenues and expenses
6 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Audit Approach (continued)
• WOUB Center for Public Media • Accounting process and internal control procedures incorporated into University systems testing • Significant asset, liability, revenue, and expense financial statement balances tested for WOUB • Review and submission of online financial reporting in accordance with Corporation for Public Broadcasting requirements • Plante Moran has been advised: • The University is in compliance with all regulatory, governmental, and grant requirements • There have been no material acts of fraud or embezzlement • There have been no significant acts of fraud related to federal programs • The University is not aware of any accounting entries made which are not in the normal course of business • The University is not aware of any material illegal or improper acts
7 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Audit Approach (continued)
• Internal Audit Assessment • Incorporate and review internal audit reports into our audit approach in certain areas • Internal audit staff will provide 120 hours towards the audit fieldwork • Materiality • Plante Moran determines materiality by the users of the statements • Identified Users – State and Federal Governmental agencies, bond rating agencies, donors, and the Board of Trustees • Factors Used – Total Assets, Total Net Assets, and Total Revenues • Communications with the Audit Committee: • Required fraud inquiries during planning process • All services provided by Plante Moran to Ohio University • Independence, in compliance with GAO requirements • Passed adjustments schedules • Changes in report presentation • Nothing significant anticipated
8 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Timing and Key Dates
Audit Scope Presentation to Audit Committee April 19, 2012 Preliminary fieldwork begins May 14 WOUB and NCAA procedures fieldwork begins May 14 (on limited basis) Preliminary fieldwork ends May 25 Year-end fieldwork – Housing for Ohio, Inc. July 23-27 Year-end fieldwork – Russ Research Center LLC July 30 – August 3 Year-end fieldwork – Inn-Ohio of Athens, Inc. August 6-10 Year-end fieldwork begins – University including A-133 and August 13 Foundation Draft financial statements to Plante Moran September 7 Draft WOUB and NCAA reports to be issued to the University September 21 Year-end fieldwork ends – University including A-133 and Foundation September 21 Closing meeting with management & final draft of financial statements September 28
9 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Timing and Key Dates (continued)
*The timeline of the financial statement preparation and review will be as follows:
Submission of Draft Management Letter to Executive Management, if applicable October 15 Submission of final University financial statements to State Auditor October 15 Submission of final Foundation financial statements to State Auditor October 15 Submission of final Russ Research Center LLC financial statements to State October 15 Auditor Submission of final Inn-Ohio of Athens, Inc. financial statements to State Auditor October 15 Submission of final Housing for Ohio, Inc. financial statements to State Auditor October 15 Submission of final WOUB and NCAA reports to State Auditor October 15 Submission of final management letter to State Auditor October 26 Certification of Corporation of Public Broadcasting online reports for WOUB November 30
10 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Letter on Auditor Responsibilities and Peer Review Report
• Under the Government Accounting Office (GAO) requirements, if an audit is completed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards, the Audit Committee and/or Board of Trustees are required to receive from the audit firm the following documents: • Letter on Auditor Responsibilities • Peer Review Report (this is performed every three years)
11 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University New Pronouncements
• GASB 60 – Accounting and Financial Reporting for Service Concession Arrangements • Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013 • Required to address financial reporting related to service concession agreements • GASB 61 – The Financial Reporting Entity Omnibus • Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013 • Required to address modifications to certain requirements for inclusion of component units in the financial reporting entity • GASB 62 – Codification of Accounting and Financial Guidance Contained in Pre-November 30, 1989 FASB and AICPA Pronouncements • Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013 • Certain FASB Statements and Interpretations, APB Opinions, and Accounting Research Bulletins of the AICPA Committee on Accounting Procedure will now be incorporated into GASB literature • GASB 63 – Financial Reporting of Deferred Outflows of Resources, Deferred Inflows of Resources, and Net Position • Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013 • Defines deferred outflows and inflows of resources as elements of consuming or acquiring net assets by the University that is applicable to a future reporting period • Incorporates deferred outflows and inflows of resources into the definition of the required components of the residual measure and by renaming that measure as net position
12 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University New Pronouncements
• GASB 64 – Derivative Instruments: Application of Hedge Accounting Termination Provisions – An Amendment of GASB 53 • Effective with the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 • Clarifies the circumstances in which hedge accounting should continue when a swap counterparty, or a swap counterparty’s credit support provider, is replaced • Reconsideration of Pension/OPEB Expense: On June 27, 2011, GASB released a pair of Exposure Drafts, Accounting and Financial Reporting for pensions – an amendment of GASB Statement No. 27 and Financial Reporting for Pension Plans – an amendment of GASB Statement No. 25 • University would report in the financial statements a net pension liability • Annual pension expense would be calculated and incorporated in the financial statements (calculation uses similar methodology as FASB standards) • Disclosure transparency, most notably University would report 10 years of required supplementary information about total pension liability, assets held for paying pensions, net pension liability, and certain pension ratios • Comments on the Exposure Drafts will be reviewed and deliberated through April 2012, with final statements expected to be issued in June 2012. Similarly, GASB has begun efforts to enhance reporting of Other Postemployment Benefit (OPEB) Accounting and Financial Reporting. The scope of this project includes improvements related to measurement, recognition, and disclosure of information about OPEB by employers and by OPEB Plans. The anticipated project timeline for these standards consists of deliberations until Exposure Drafts are issued in June 2012, with issuance of final Statements in June 2013
13 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Appendix - Definitions
• Deficiency • A deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A deficiency in design exists when (a) a control necessary to meet the control objective is missing or (b) an existing control is not properly designedso that even if the control operates as designed, the control objective is not always met. A deficiency in operation exists when a properly designed control does not operate as designed or when the person performing the control does not possess the necessary authority or qualifications to perform the control effectively. Deficiencies may involve one or more of the five interrelated components of internal control.
• Significant Deficiency • A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough o merit attention by those charged with governance.
• Material Weakness • A “material weakness” is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and correct on a timely basis.
• No material weaknesses were identified during the 2011 audit.
• Fraud • The term “fraud” includes “misstatements” arising from fraudulent financial reporting and misstatements arising from misappropriation of assets.
• “Misstatements” arising from “fraudulent financial reporting” are intentional misstatements, or omissions of amounts or disclosures in financial statements intended to deceive financial statement users.
14 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Appendix - Definitions
• Fraud (continued) • “Misstatements” arising from “misappropriation of assets” involve the theft of assets where the effect of the theft causes the financial statements not to be presented in conformity with GAAP.
• The University is responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud.
• GAAP • Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Used by almost all entities in the USA to prepare periodic financial statements.
• Allowance • An estimate determined by management based on past history of the amount of student and contribution receivables at June 30 that are not expected to be received.
• NCAA Agreed-Upon Procedures • National Collegiate Athletic Association requires procedures to be performed in accordance with their bylaws. These procedures relate to the classification of revenues and expenses by athletic program and the content within the respective line items of revenues and expenses.
• A-133 Audit • The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133 which sets forth standards for obtaining consistency and uniformity among Federal agencies for the audit of States, local governments, and non-profit organizations expending Federal awards. This is also known as “Single Audit” and is focused on programs funded with federal dollars. At Ohio University, this primarily consists of student financial aid and research and development grants.
15 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Appendix - Definitions
• 990T • Corporate income tax form for exempt organization unrelated income. This primarily relates to income earned on limited partnerships that is considered taxable by the IRS (real estate and natural resources), and non-educational use of institutional property.
• Non-Exchange Transaction • Revenues received by the University that are deemed not related to the University providing a service. They consist primarily of gifts, investment income, federal Pell grant revenue and state operating appropriations. State appropriations are subject to annual approval by state legislature and are reported based on the state operating budget that funds the appropriation to the University.
• FASB • Financial Accounting Standards Board is the governing accounting body that issues reporting pronouncements for private sector organizations. The Foundation prepares its financial statements in accordance with these pronouncements and guidance.
• GAAS • Generally Accepted Auditing Standards. The standards that govern the conduct of independent audits of non-public companies, as determined by the Auditing Standards Board (ASB) of the AICPA.
• GAGAS • Generally Accepted Governmental Auditing Standards. Informally known as “Yellow Book”, these standards guide all audits of governmental units.
• GASB • Governmental Accounting Standards Board is the governing accounting body that issues reporting pronouncements. Ohio University prepares their financial statements in accordance with these pronouncements and guidance.
16 webinars.plantemoran.com Ohio University Appendix - Definitions
• Unqualified Opinion • A signed representation by an auditor as to the reliability and fairness of a set of financial statements. The opinion could be qualified, unqualified, except for or adverse.
• Auditor Opinion Date • The date the audit is completed and the auditor can provide their opinion. This is defined as the date the audit fieldwork and reviews are completed and the date management has reviewed the financial statements and provided a signed representation letter to the auditors.
• Material Misstatement • To present accidental or intentional untrue financial statement information that influences a company’s value.
• Significant Adjustments • A material error in financial reporting discovered by the auditor during performance of their audit fieldwork which was large enough that it was required to be booked to the financial statements and disclosed to the audit committee or board.
• Passed Adjustments • A summary of proposed account adjustments not recorded by management and reviewed by auditors and determined, individually or in the aggregate, not to have a significant effect on the financial reporting process and therefore they are not recorded in the financial statements.
17 webinars.plantemoran.com A higher return on experience. Thank You! We look forward to continue serving Ohio University.
Higher Education Group
Robert Shenton 614.222.9064 [email protected]
Keith Martinez 614.222.9086 [email protected]
Danny Sklenicka 614.222.9133 [email protected]
webinars.plantemoran.com18
Audit Committee Janetta King, Trustee April 19, 2012
1 University Risk Management Initiative Update 2012
Enterprise Risk Management
2
Associate Vice President Risk Management & Safety Joe S. Adams II, CSP
Chief Audit Executive Jeff Davis, CPA
3 Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is a system or process to deal with all risks facing an entire organization.
The University Risk Management Initiative (URMI) is a systematic means to manage enterprise wide risks at OHIO.
University Risk Management Initiative
4 Why the URMI?
• If we can tame uncertainty and improve the decisions made in regard to risk, we will significantly improve our ability to accomplish our goals.
• URMI builds upon the benefits of traditional Risk Management by applying its principles to operational hazards, compliance, reputation and economic risks.
University Risk Management Initiative
5 The Bottom Line…
The URMI will allow OHIO to better identify, understand and manage all risk associated with achieving our mission.
University Risk Management Initiative
6 Implementation Plan for University Risk Management Initiative:
1. Make a deliberate decision to pursue an URMI. * Completed January 2011
2. Appoint project leaders to coordinate the URMI initiative. * Completed March 2011…Joe Adams & George Wendt
University Risk Management Initiative
7 3. Establishment of the University Risk Council (URC) * Council membership identified July 2011…Completed * President’s letter September 2011 …Completed * Initial meeting October 2011 …Completed * Meeting with consultant January 2012…Completed
University Risk Management Initiative
8 4. Select an agency to assist with the risk assessment and implementation * Initial contacts July 2011 * Selection November 2011 … Bickmore Risk Services (BRS) …Completed
University Risk Management Initiative
9 5. In person 1 on 1 interviews with approximately 20 key personnel to identify system risks. To include Board of Trustee members…January 2012…Completed
6. Follow up on-line interviews and survey with secondary list. * Provided secondary list to PURC and consultant February 2012
University Risk Management Initiative
10 7. Complete a draft risk assessment and preliminary Heat Map.
8. URC and consultant develop the risk register and the Heat Map.
University Risk Management Initiative
11 9. URC coordinates remediation of risks that can be immediately negated.
10. URC assigns a project manager to selected risks to ensure their proper handling.
University Risk Management Initiative
12 11. Project managers develop a remediation plan for their assigned risks.
12. Project managers periodically report to the URC their progress on each risk.
University Risk Management Initiative
13 13. Remediated items are monitored and new items are placed on the risk register and the heat map.
University Risk Management Initiative
14 Board of Trustees Involvement
Help Populate the Heat Map ◦ January 2012 Interviews
Assist in Prioritizing Risks
Receive Annual Updates ◦ April 2012
University Risk Management Initiative
15 Institute of Internal Auditor Recommended Roles for Internal Audit
University Risk Management Initiative
16 Role of Internal Audit
Evaluating risk management processes.
Reviewing reporting and management of key risks.
University Risk Management Initiative
17 Internal Audit - Appropriate Safeguards
Provide advice and support for decision making as opposed to making risk management decisions.
Be clear that management remains responsible for risk management.
Not manage any risks on behalf of management.
University Risk Management Initiative
18
Thank You!
University Risk Management Initiative
19
AGENDA University Executive Committee Ohio University Inn, Wilson Room 7:30 a.m. - Friday, April 20, 2012
32. Consent Agenda, Honorary Degrees
EXECUTIVE SESSION
HONORARY DEGREE AWARD RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the University Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended that Ohio University honor the person listed below through the conferral of an honorary degree, Andrew Alexander, Doctor of Communication
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University approves the degree recommended be conferred at an appropriate time in the future.
Andrew Alexander
An Ohio University alumnus, Mr. Alexander is an eminent, award-winning journalist and a Scripps Howard Visiting Professional in the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism. His career in journalism has spanned four decades and includes stints as a reporter, editor and Washington bureau chief. He also served as ombudsman for the Washington Post.
He has reported from more than 50 countries and won or shared in prizes for his work and investigative journalism including the Raymond Clapper Award for distinguished Washington correspondence, the Global Media Award, the Thomas L. Stokes Award for environmental reporting, the Ohio Associated Press award for investigative reporting, and the Ohio Associated Press award for feature writing. He is a recipient of Ohio University’s Medal of Merit and Alumnus of the Year award.
His commitment to his profession and his alma mater are evident through his service on the board of directors of the Committee to Protect Journalists, the board of the American Society of Newspapers Editors, the E. W. Scripps School of Journalism Advisory Board and the Scripps College of Communication Dean’s Advisory Board, as well his support of future journalists through his generosity in funding scholarships at Ohio University for minority students.
HONORARY DEGREE AWARD RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the University Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended that Ohio University honor the person listed below through the conferral of an honorary degree, Nancy Cartwright, Doctor of Communication
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University approves the degree recommended be conferred at an appropriate time in the future. Nancy Cartwright
A native of Kettering, Ohio, Ms. Cartwright began her postsecondary education at Ohio University, and is a past member and lifetime supporter of the Ohio University Debate Team.
Ms. Cartwright began her professional career as the voice of Gloria in the animated series Richie Rich, followed by a starring role in the television movie Marian Rose White and her first feature film, Twilight Zone: The Movie. In 1987, she began voicing Bart Simpson for a short animation series featured on The Tracey Ullman Show.
In 1989, The Simpsons premiered as a regular half-hour show, and has become the longest running scripted show in television history. She also serves as the voice for several of the show's supporting characters. Ms. Cartwright has also provided voice work for dozens of animated television shows including Rugrats, All Grown Up!, Kim Possible, Animaniacs, The Critic and The Kellys.
Ms. Cartwright received an Emmy Award and an Annie Award for Outstanding Individual Achievement in Voice-Over Performance as Bart Simpson, as well as Emmys for Animaniacs, Pinky, Elmira & the Brain and a Drama-Logue Award for her one-woman play, In Search of Fellini. In 2000, Ms. Cartwright released the best-selling book, My Life as a 10-Year-Old Boy, detailing her career as an entertainer and voice-actor, and providing a behind-the-scenes look at The Simpsons.
In addition to her voice and acting work, she has transitioned to producer as well, starting two companies, Cartwright Entertainment, Inc. and SportsBlast, LLC. These include animation projects, a feature film, documentary works, audio books, live presentations - all innovative, high quality content designed to bring audiences laughter and inspire creative imagination.
HONORARY DEGREE AWARD RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the University Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended that Ohio University honor the person listed below through the conferral of an honorary degree, Hwa-Wei Lee, Doctor of Letters
AND WHEREAS, it remains for the President to determine whether this person wishes to accept the award.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University approves the degree recommended be conferred at an appropriate time in the future after the President has determined the person recommended wishes to be honored.
Hwa-Wei Lee, Ph.D.
As former Dean of University Libraries, Dr. Lee devoted much of his professional life to Ohio University and “put us on the map” both in the development of the Library into a major international research library and in fostering key partnerships in Asia.
His twenty-one tenure as dean is marked by the libraries more than doubling their collections from fewer than 750,000 to more than two million; increasing the libraries endowment from less than $20,000 to more than $8 million; initiation of major grant projects through consecutive awards from renowned sources including the National Endowment of the Arts; and the recognition of Alden Library as one of the hundred and fifty research libraries in the nation.
Dr. Lee was the architect behind the first-of-its-kind resource center the Dr. Shao You-Bao Overseas Chinese Documentation and Research Center. He also was instrumental in the establishment of the Hwa-Wei Lee Center for International Collections in the Ohio University Libraries and developed the idea and plan for the opening of a remote storage facility – later named in his honor – which extended the life of the main library building.
His dedication to his profession has benefitted Ohio University as well as the organizations and committees on which he served including the Library of Congress, the Ohio Library Council, the State Library of Ohio, the Council for International Exchange of Scholars, and the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on institutions of Higher Education.
A scholar in his own right, he is widely published and has presented at numerous conferences. His professional accomplishments have been recognized with distinguished service awards from the American Library Association, the Asia/Pacific American Librarians Association, Chinese American Librarians Association, Ohio LINK, and the Ohio University Foundation. He also was recognized as an Ohio University Outstanding Administrator, the American Library Association’s John Ames Humphrey Award for contributions to International Librarianship and the Ohio Hall of Fame Librarians.
HONORARY DEGREE AWARD RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the University Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended that Ohio University honor the person listed below through the conferral of an honorary degree, Thomas J. Meyer, Doctor of Chemistry
AND WHEREAS, it remains for the President to determine whether this person wishes to accept the award.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University approves the degree recommended be conferred at an appropriate time in the future after the President has determined the person recommended wishes to be honored.
Thomas J. Meyer, Ph.D.
One of the leading chemists in the world, Dr. Meyer, an Ohio University alumnus, is highly respected in his field. He is the Arey Distinguished Professor of Chemistry at the University of North Carolina.
His research focus includes electron transfer, solar energy conversion, artificial photosynthesis, solar fuels and photochemical water splitting. He has pioneered the use of ruthenium and osmium polypyridine complexes in the study of a variety of solar energy conversion processes involving proton-coupled electron transfer, a process that is fundamental to water oxidation
Widely published, he has authored more than 600 articles with more than 33,000 citations. His work has appeared in Inorganic Chemistry, Journal of the American Chemical Society, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Angewandte Chemie, Coordination of Chemistry Reviews, Chemical Reviews, and Chemical Research.
His significant contributions to the field of chemistry have resulted in numerous significant honors including a Guggenheim Fellowship, Basolo Medal from Northwestern University, Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship, Centenary Medal from the Royal Society of Chemistry, and a Research Triangle President’s Award to name a few. He also received a Medal of Merit from Ohio University.
HONORARY DEGREE AWARD RESOLUTION 2012 –
WHEREAS, the University Committee on Honorary Degrees has recommended that Ohio University honor the person listed below through the conferral of an honorary degree, Paul Schullery, Doctor of Literature
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of Ohio University approves the degree recommended be conferred at an appropriate time in the future. Paul Schullery
A renowned author and Ohio University alumnus, Mr. Schullery is considered the leading writer on National Parks and the American West. He has authored, co-authored, or edited more than 40 books and hundreds of articles on nature and our use of it.
His books on nature include The Bears of Yellowstone, The Grand Canyon, American Bears, Mountain Time, Searching for Yellowstone, America’s National Parks, Real Alaska, Lewis and Clark Among the Grizzlies, and This High, Wild Country. He has written for dozens of publications including Encyclopedia Britannica Yearbook of Science and the Future, BioScience, The New York Times, and Outdoor Life.
Beyond writing, he has worked at various times for the National Park Service in Yellowstone National Park as a ranger-naturalist, historian-archivist, environmental protection specialist, senior editor in the Yellowstone Center for Resources, and Chief of Cultural Resources. He also served as executive director of The American Museum of Fly Fishing in Manchester, Vermont. He wrote a series of books on the history of culture of fly fishing.
Recognition for his distinguished work includes the Roderick Haig-Brown Award from the Federation of Fly Fishers, Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Montana State University, the Wallace Stegner Award from the University of Colorado Center for the American West, a Panda Award for scriptwriting from Wildscreen International, and the Communications Award from the George Wright Society.